So. Are McCain hands not dirty. He has connections to Fannie Mae and Freddie . How much did John McCain? You neo-CONS act like McCain is an angel his hands are dirty too and both of them had dealing with these companies. Stop just putting everything on Obama. (=
FYI,
Fact-Checking the Fact-Checker
By Jimmie on Sep 19, 2008 in Johnny Mac, Oh, THAT liberal media., The Economy and Your Money, The Obamessiah
The Washington Post has weighed in, in its “Fact Checker” column, on a John McCain ad and manages to make a hash of the whole thing. Whoever wrote this didn’t pay much attention to McCain’s ad and seems completely oblivious to the fact that they effectively proved the reporter who wrote the original Raines article was wrong.
Which is pretty much what I said yesterday.
The column calls John McCain’s ad “particularly dubious”, the evidence for the connection between Obama and Franklin Raines “flimsy”, and accuses the campaign of “exaggerating wildly”.
Strong words. Does it have the proof to back them up? Well, no. Actually, Fact Checker makes some dubious and exaggerated claims of its own. As it happens, Fact Checker requires some fact-checking of its own.
First, Fact Checker says the Raines profile was in the Style section. It wasn’t. It was on the front page of the Financial section. There’s a decided difference between a profile in the Style section and one in the Financial section.
Second, Fact Checker claims that the McCain ad calls Raines a “close adviser” of Barack Obama. It doesn’t. You can check that for yourself by reading the transcript of the ad that sits right on top of the Fact Checker article. Take a look for yourself. The word “close” never appears in the ad.
Third, Fact Checker checked with the reporter who wrote the Raines profile who said she asked “if he was engaged at all with the Democrats’ quest for the White House. He said that he had gotten a couple of calls from the Obama campaign. I asked him about what, and he said ‘oh, general housing, economy issues.’ (’Not mortgage/foreclosure meltdown or Fannie-specific,’ I asked, and he said ‘no.’)”
So even though, according to the reporter, Raines never mentioned mortgages, she saw fit to put that in the article. She also conflated “a couple calls” to “seeking his [Obama's] advice”. The reporter got it wrong, not John McCain. You can hardly blame him for trusting the reporting of a professional journalist with an article on the front page of the business section of one of the most-read newspapers in the world.
Well, the Fact Checker folks certainly can blame him for it. But they are wrong to do so, just as they were wrong in other details of their supposed fact-check. I’d say a rather large correction and an apology are in order, both to Raines for misrepresenting what he said, and to John McCain, for lying about his ad and for betraying his trust with a shabby news article.
I don’t think you’ll see either one, which is a sign of how far the Washington Post has sunk as a reliable news source.
Obama's campaign also has gone after McCain over campaign manager Rick Davis, who has worked as an influential lobbyist and whose firm reportedly worked for Freddie Mac, another major mortgage firm that was taken over by the government.
Are John McCain hands clean? No.
CNN did a fact check today on McCain's ad claiming that Obama was one of the largest recipients of funds from Freddie and Fannie.
This is another distortion of the truth.
It is true Obama received somewhere around $130,000 from Freddie and Fannie employees.
However, McCain received $169,000 from Freddie and Fannie executives and lobbyists. Obama received $16,000 from executives and lobbyists.