'Pledge to America' Fact-Checked

‘Pledge to America’ Fact-Checked

PoliticsSeptember 2010 • Views: 3,324

Would you be surprised to learn that the GOP’s “Pledge to America” plays fast and loose with facts?

factcheck.org counts the ways: FactChecking ‘The Pledge’.

Summary

The Republican “Pledge to America,” released Sept. 23, contains some dubious factual claims:

It declares that “the only parts of the economy expanding are government and our national debt.” Not true. So far this year government employment has declined slightly, while private sector employment has increased by 763,000 jobs.

It says that “jobless claims continue to soar,” when in fact they are down eight percent from their worst levels.

It repeats a bogus assertion that the Internal Revenue Service may need to expand by 16,500 positions, an inflated estimate based on false assumptions and guesswork.

It claims the stimulus bill is costing $1 trillion, considerably more than the $814 billion, 10-year price tag currently estimated by nonpartisan congressional budget experts.

It says Obama’s tax proposals would raise taxes on “roughly half the small business income in America,” an exaggeration. Much of the income the GOP is counting actually comes from big businesses making over $50 million a year.

For details on these and other examples please read on to the Analysis section.

Jump to bottom

39 comments

Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Mon, Sep 27, 2010 10:53:35am

Facts, we don't need no stinking Facts. They have a well known liberal bias.

William of Orange Mon, Sep 27, 2010 10:55:36am

|But the big problem is how to get that information into ignorant heads. Do you think the media is going to slap the authors around the had with that info?

I'm pessimistic.

rwdflynavy Mon, Sep 27, 2010 10:56:57am

It claims the stimulus bill is costing $1 trillion, considerably more than the $814 billion, 10-year price tag currently estimated by nonpartisan congressional budget experts.

Well that's a relief!!
//

Kragar Mon, Sep 27, 2010 10:57:21am

The Pledge is nothing more than a steaming pile of horseshit

Lidane Mon, Sep 27, 2010 10:58:30am

Meanwhile, Boehner is out there saying the Pledge isn't so much a bunch of solutions being offered, but rather the GOP supposedly laying out the size of the problem:

Youtube Video

[Link: thinkprogress.org...]

Killgore Trout Mon, Sep 27, 2010 10:59:40am

re: #2 William of Orange

|But the big problem is how to get that information into ignorant heads. Do you think the media is going to slap the authors around the had with that info?

I'm pessimistic.

Probably not. Republican's dishonest claims about healtchare reform and the economy have become so common that the dishonest claims are simply expected at this point.
The pledge was designed for wingnut consumption and most of them were unimpressed. There weren't enough specifics to woo moderates. It was a flop.

iossarian Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:01:11am

re: #2 William of Orange

George Lakoff, the cognitive science guy, was writing about this on DKos today. In line with his previous work, he was basically pointing out that people won't care about the fact checking: the Pledge is simply fluff with the right buzzwords in there: liberty, low taxes, respect for "traditional" (i.e., white male Christian) American culture etc.

His claim (which I more or less agree with) is that there's no point trying to pick it apart, because that just reinforces the "frame". If people are opposed to it, they need to be putting their own views out there, not just trying to point out the logical flaws in their opponents' views.

What, me worry? Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:01:16am

re: #3 rwdflynavy

Well that's a relief!!
//

You... aren't you the one who said that the "liberal media" never invites the rightwingers to their networks?

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Sol Berdinowitz Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:04:41am

re: #7 iossarian

George Lakoff, the cognitive science guy, was writing about this on DKos today. In line with his previous work, he was basically pointing out that people won't care about the fact checking: the Pledge is simply fluff with the right buzzwords in there: liberty, low taxes, respect for "traditional" (i.e., white male Christian) American culture etc.

His claim (which I more or less agree with) is that there's no point trying to pick it apart, because that just reinforces the "frame". If people are opposed to it, they need to be putting their own views out there, not just trying to point out the logical flaws in their opponents' views.

Especially as the "Pledge" is just an internal party ploy directed towards wresting control of the Rpublican Party from the Tea Party express.

John Q Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:08:09am

Would you be surprised to learn that the GOP’s “Pledge to America” plays fast and loose with facts?

No.

But I would be surprised if it didn't.

Interesting Times Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:09:02am

re: #8 marjoriemoon

You... aren't you the one who said that the "liberal media" never invites the rightwingers to their networks?

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

No, that was this steaming pile of douchebaggery to the nth degree.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:09:37am

From the Libertarian Party: The Republicans owe America an apology, not a pledge:

[Link: www.lp.org...]

Instead of a "Pledge to America," the Republicans should have written an "Apology to America." It should have gone something like this:

"We're sorry, America. Sorry we grew the federal government budget from $1.7 trillion to over $3 trillion. Sorry we added $5 trillion to the federal debt. Sorry we doubled the size of the Department of Education. Sorry we started two incredibly costly foreign wars. Sorry we supported the absurd and costly TARP bailouts. Sorry we created a huge and costly new Medicare entitlement. Sorry we did nothing to end the costly and destructive War on Drugs. Sorry we did nothing to reform the federal government's near-prohibition on immigration. But hey, at least we helped you by shifting a lot of your tax burden onto your children and grandchildren."

There are so many lies, distortions, hypocrisies, and idiocy in this document that it's hard to know where to start.

It is deeply insulting to see the Republicans refer to "America's founding values" on their cover. The Republican Party has no understanding whatsoever of America's founding values. They have proven and re-proven that for decades.

garhighway Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:10:06am

re: #3 rwdflynavy

Well that's a relief!!
//

Ironic, though, isn't it? the "pinch every penny" GOP making $200B mistakes?

It is as if they really aren't that interested in the spending dollars. Or at least getting that part right.

Lidane Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:11:01am

re: #9 ralphieboy

Especially as the "Pledge" is just an internal party ploy directed towards wresting control of the Rpublican Party from the Tea Party express.

Yeah, this. It's pointless except as the last, desperate gasp of the traditional GOP power establishment trying to retain control of the party.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:11:31am

Charles, does the link I posted help demonstrate that there ARE differences between the Republicans and the Libertarians?

What, me worry? Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:11:38am

re: #11 publicityStunted

No, that was this steaming pile of douchebaggery to the nth degree.

Aaahh thank you!! the "rw" through me off.

My apologies to rwdflynavy!

jamesfirecat Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:13:16am

re: #12 pharmmajor

From the Libertarian Party: The Republicans owe America an apology, not a pledge:

[Link: www.lp.org...]

Sadly I don't see anything about "sorry for allowing socons to play fast and loose with rights that should be unquestionably granted and uncontended."

jamesfirecat Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:14:07am

re: #15 pharmmajor

Charles, does the link I posted help demonstrate that there ARE differences between the Republicans and the Libertarians?

Yes, the Libertarians are wrong for America at the moment for completely different reasons that the GOP!

Interesting Times Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:16:25am

re: #16 marjoriemoon

Aaahh thank you!! the "rw" through me off.

I figured that's what happened :) As for hoping the person who really did make that comment might change his mind based on facts, you can forget about that - he thinks (and votes) with his little head.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:21:35am

re: #17 jamesfirecat

Sadly I don't see anything about "sorry for allowing socons to play fast and loose with rights that should be unquestionably granted and uncontended."

Well that's a given; something you know the Republicans will never own up to.

DaddyG Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:23:44am

I'm afraid the cynical thought process behind this is, "well if empty rhetoric and sweeping statements worked for the Dems in 08..."

Political figures are going to be very hesitant to put forward real platform specifics these days given how recent campaigns have gone.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:24:16am

re: #18 jamesfirecat

Yes, the Libertarians are wrong for America at the moment for completely different reasons that the GOP!

Care to explain WHY the LP is wrong?

Okami Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:30:14am

re: #21 DaddyG

I think the thought process is more along the lines of, "Let's keep doing what we've always done and hope it works". Is there a single thing in the pledge that the republicans haven't been saying repeatedly for at least a year?

jamesfirecat Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:33:04am

re: #22 pharmmajor

Care to explain WHY the LP is wrong?

Because government and freedom is not a zero sum game.

That said let me hear what you /the Liberterian party stand for and I'll be able to answer your question more fully.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:36:24am

re: #24 jamesfirecat

Because government and freedom is not a zero sum game.

That said let me hear what you /the Liberterian party stand for and I'll be able to answer your question more fully.

First of all, we are not about abolishing government, but establishing limited government.

What do we stand for? Separation of church and state, adherence to the constitution, a free market economy, cutting down wasteful federal spending, lower taxes, not starting wars or "nation-building" campaigns, protecting civil liberties, and ensuring that people aren't punished for victimless crimes (such as recreational marijuana use).

jamesfirecat Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:40:34am

re: #25 pharmmajor

First of all, we are not about abolishing government, but establishing limited government.

What do we stand for? Separation of church and state, adherence to the constitution, a free market economy, cutting down wasteful federal spending, lower taxes, not starting wars or "nation-building" campaigns, protecting civil liberties, and ensuring that people aren't punished for victimless crimes (such as recreational marijuana use).

I can agree with the the first, and the the last without quibble.

As for cutting down wasteful federal spending... that makes a fine bumper sticker but I'd prefer to go line by line through issues because what one person might consider wasteful federal spending (volcano research) might prove to be anything but.

I can agree with you that starting wars is not what America should be all about, but on the other hand "nation building" may be the only reasonable choice we have.

For example if we'd bit our teeth and done it in Iraq after the first Gulf War we wouldn't have "needed" to invade all over again.

Oh and I can also agree with protecting civil liberties.

I suppose my chief problem with libertarians frequently show up when we get down to the nitty gritty of what to do rather than their philosophy.

Liberal Classic Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:44:05am

The LP is too fringe. It has never really been able to portray a moderate face, and has always been pushed to extremes. The LP isn't alone in this, the other "third" parties (i.e. Greens and Reform) also experience the same phenomenon.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:45:34am

re: #26 jamesfirecat

I can agree with the the first, and the the last without quibble.

As for cutting down wasteful federal spending... that makes a fine bumper sticker but I'd prefer to go line by line through issues because what one person might consider wasteful federal spending (volcano research) might prove to be anything but.

I can agree with you that starting wars is not what America should be all about, but on the other hand "nation building" may be the only reasonable choice we have.

For example if we'd bit our teeth and done it in Iraq after the first Gulf War we wouldn't have "needed" to invade all over again.

Oh and I can also agree with protecting civil liberties.

I suppose my chief problem with libertarians frequently show up when we get down to the nitty gritty of what to do rather than their philosophy.

Well, going through an issue thoroughly is a good way to ensure that a program isn't wasteful. For example, a program that ensures people living in poverty or who are disabled have a financial safety net is a good plan, provided there's a way to identify those who are just trying to cheat the system for free money, and a way to help those people who are truly in need find jobs.

As for Iraq, well... we shouldn't have gone in there in the first place. Afghanistan I'm okay with, but we had no business in Iraq, even if our intentions were good. Sorry.

I can see where you would have some problems with the party, but libertarianism is a spectrum; we have extremists just like every political party, but we have far more moderates.

Obdicut Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:49:36am

re: #25 pharmmajor

a free market economy, cutting down wasteful federal spending, lower taxes

But not an actual free market, right? Because that would be terrible.

And just lower taxes? Why automatically lower? Doesn't this suggest that you're not actually analyzing whether taxes are at an appropriate level, but simply using the red meat phrase 'lower taxes'?

I mean, taxes are lower now, historically, than they have been for large parts of the 20th century. So why even lower?

jamesfirecat Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:50:17am

re: #28 pharmmajor

Well, going through an issue thoroughly is a good way to ensure that a program isn't wasteful. For example, a program that ensures people living in poverty or who are disabled have a financial safety net is a good plan, provided there's a way to identify those who are just trying to cheat the system for free money, and a way to help those people who are truly in need find jobs.

As for Iraq, well... we shouldn't have gone in there in the first place. Afghanistan I'm okay with, but we had no business in Iraq, even if our intentions were good. Sorry.

I can see where you would have some problems with the party, but libertarianism is a spectrum; we have extremists just like every political party, but we have far more moderates.

If the last line is true then you seem to have the same problem as Muslims where its the crazy pants who get all the attention.

And yes I agree with you, the first Gulf War was a good idea, because we were standing up for another country that was getting invaded.

Afghanistan was a good war because we were retaliating for being attacked just like WW2 once we tracked down where the guy responsible was.

Invading Iraq under W was a pointless war that took our attention away from the real threat and was a general "clusterf***" from start to finish.

MarkAM Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:53:32am

re: #25 pharmmajor

You do realize that current federal income taxes are very low relative to what they've been since 1917. The top rate has only been lower from 1925-1931 and 1998-92. If you look at the post WW2 years, 1946-1981, when American prosperity was at its apex, and the middle class was growing rapidly, the top marginal rate ranged between 70-92%.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

As for "adherence to the Constitution," please explain what you mean.

Romantic Heretic Mon, Sep 27, 2010 11:58:27am

re: #28 pharmmajor

For example, a program that ensures people living in poverty or who are disabled have a financial safety net is a good plan, provided there's a way to identify those who are just trying to cheat the system for free money, and a way to help those people who are truly in need find jobs.

As someone who's been living a good portion of his life on a disability and who has had plenty of experience with people 'gaming the system' I can pretty much guarantee that any attempt to reduce the gaming will harm the poor and disabled more than the gamers. The gamers will just game the new system. The actual poor and disabled will jump through the new hoops and many will be cut off because they won't meet the new criteria.

I've seen it many times in the last twenty years.

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 12:37:00pm

re: #32 Romantic Heretic

As someone who's been living a good portion of his life on a disability and who has had plenty of experience with people 'gaming the system' I can pretty much guarantee that any attempt to reduce the gaming will harm the poor and disabled more than the gamers. The gamers will just game the new system. The actual poor and disabled will jump through the new hoops and many will be cut off because they won't meet the new criteria.

I've seen it many times in the last twenty years.

I'm very sorry to hear that. It's a shame that the truly needy get shafted because some scumbags exploit the system.

ClaudeMonet Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:27:15pm

re: #31 MarkAM

As for "adherence to the Constitution," please explain what you mean.

It usually means, "Ignore the parts my interest group doesn't like and be rigidly observant about the parts my group likes."

pharmmajor Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:28:47pm

re: #34 ClaudeMonet

As for "adherence to the Constitution," please explain what you mean.

It usually means, "Ignore the parts my interest group doesn't like and be rigidly observant about the parts my group likes."

Not for the LP. It means "adhere to EVERY Amendment."

garhighway Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:31:00pm

re: #35 pharmmajor

Not for the LP. It means "adhere to EVERY Amendment."

So please explain to us what would be different in your future state of adherence to EVERY Amendment. Which ones are not being adhered to? What, exactly, do you think the problem is?

theheat Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:05:14pm

On a related note, my dad asked me to check his email for him, since he's become too ill to sit at the computer. There were 91 (that's NINETY ONE) emails from fellow GOPs having various meltdowns about that socialist Kenyan POTUS of ours, and their various interpretations of their made-up horseshit pledge to America.

My dad asked, "Is there anything in there I need to know about?"

"Fuck no," I answered. Then I highlighted and deleted the whole shittin' mess of them. As if watching Fox news day in and day out, hasn't affected his blood pressure and rotted his brain enough. JFC, he still believes Obama's death panels are coming for him. He's actually convinced the reason he's dying has something to do with Obama. Nothing is particular, but he's embraced the idea and found a place to place the blame. To that, the other GOPs on the list nod in unison.

The GOPs pledge to America is cheap fearmongering and lies, spoon fed to anyone eager to blame the ills of the world (and possibly their own) on Obama. At best it's deceitful, at worst it's evil; the effect it has on people is evil. It's hateful, ignorant, oppressive, and straight out of the dark ages.

Yes, it's evil to poison people's minds with slight of hand, exaggerations, and fear. That, and knuckle dragging stupidity, is all the GOP has left to offer, to keep its herd moving over the cliff.

Interesting Times Mon, Sep 27, 2010 4:14:49pm

re: #37 theheat

Yes, it's evil to poison people's minds with slight of hand, exaggerations, and fear. That, and knuckle dragging stupidity, is all the GOP has left to offer, to keep its herd moving over the cliff.

QFT. You need to either post this on a live thread or better still, Page it. Sorry your dad became its victim :(

Stephen T. Wed, Sep 29, 2010 8:43:45am

I recently spoke with a GOP candidate for my state's senate. She insisted that the fact check here is wrong:

It says Obama’s tax proposals would raise taxes on “roughly half the small business income in America,” an exaggeration. Much of the income the GOP is counting actually comes from big businesses making over $50 million a year.

because businesses like Borders, Best Buy and Walmart are small businesses. I tried to introduce her to the concept of cognitive dissonance but she insisted that there were more people she needed to see.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

‘Pledge to America’ Fact-Checked

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud