About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

WSJ omits facts about McCain's voting record, reversal on immigration

August 13, 2008 1:52 pm ET

SUMMARY: The Wall Street Journal reported that the RNC "made note of Sen. Obama's party-line votes. During the 109th Congress, which was in session in 2005-2006, Sen. Obama voted along party lines 97% of the time. Sen. McCain voted with his party 81% of the time, according to Congressional Quarterly." But in citing only the CQ 2005-2006 "party unity" scores provided by the RNC, the Journal failed to note that according to a 2008 CQ study, McCain voted in support of the Bush administration's position 95 percent of the time in 2007, making McCain the administration's most reliable supporter in the Senate that year.

30 Comments

In an August 13 Wall Street Journal article, Elizabeth Holmes and Amy Chozick reported that the Republican National Committee (RNC) "criticized" Sen. Barack Obama "for, in its view, his lack of bipartisan accomplishments." The article continued: "They made note of Sen. Obama's party-line votes. During the 109th Congress, which was in session in 2005-2006, Sen. Obama voted along party lines 97% of the time. Sen. McCain voted with his party 81% of the time, according to Congressional Quarterly." But in citing only the Congressional Quarterly 2005-2006 "party unity" scores provided by the RNC, Holmes and Chozick failed to note that according to a 2008 Congressional Quarterly study, McCain voted in support of the Bush administration's position 95 percent of the time in 2007, making McCain the administration's most reliable supporter in the Senate that year. Indeed, in a January 13 article (accessed via Nexis), CQ reported that "McCain's 95 percent support [for Bush] score for last year was the highest in the chamber." Moreover, CQ also found that McCain has voted with Bush 90 percent of the time over the seven-and-a-half years of Bush's presidency.

In addition, discussing the establishment of "Republicans for Obama," Holmes and Chozick wrote: "Despite Sen. McCain's bipartisan activity, including on campaign finance and immigration, the Republicans behind the Obama support group express dismay with how his candidacy has evolved." But in citing immigration as an example of McCain's "bipartisan activity," Holmes and Chozick did not note that, under pressure from the Republican base, McCain reversed himself on a key component of immigration reform, now saying that "we've got to secure the borders first" -- a position at odds with his prior assertion that border security could not be disaggregated from other aspects of comprehensive immigration reform without being rendered ineffective. McCain further stated during the January 30 Republican presidential debate that he would not vote for the comprehensive reform bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) if it came to a vote on the Senate floor.

From the August 13 Journal article:

Sen. McCain echoed the same sentiment in his opening statements. "I know Americans are tired of the partisanship," he said before opening the floor up to questions. "I have a record of reaching across the aisle, reaching across the aisle and working with my friends, whether it be Joe Lieberman or Ted Kennedy."

The Arizona senator's comments were supported by the Republican National Committee, which criticized the Illinois senator for, in its view, his lack of bipartisan accomplishments. They made note of Sen. Obama's party-line votes. During the 109th Congress, which was in session in 2005-2006, Sen. Obama voted along party lines 97% of the time. Sen. McCain voted with his party 81% of the time, according to Congressional Quarterly.

Despite Sen. McCain's bipartisan activity, including on campaign finance and immigration, the Republicans behind the Obama support group express dismay with how his candidacy has evolved.

Mr. [Lincoln] Chafee said that he supported Sen. McCain on a number of issues while he was in the Senate but said he's seen a sharp change. "It's a different John McCain," Mr. Chafee said, pointing to the candidate's reversal from previous stances to support offshore drilling and Bush tax cuts. "Seeing the two different John McCains is a fracture in his credibility."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by BottleBlonde (August 13, 2008 2:26 pm ET)
         

      They (O'Reilly and others) were making an issue of the Obama ad that quoted his votes from a few years ago where he voted with Bush 90% of the time. Only to find out, the most recent polling of him showed an even greater alliance between McCain and Bush.

      The WSJ talking about one metric, one way to measure the candidates, while ignoring other metrics, is conservative misinformation.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by DAWUSS (August 13, 2008 3:09 pm ET)
           
        Doesn't that contradict the flip-flopping from Johnnie Mac?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mary59 (August 13, 2008 3:17 pm ET)
             
          No.  He's flipped from previous positions to vote WITH Bush and collect the Bush family fund raising machine.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by princeofwheels (August 13, 2008 3:48 pm ET)
               

            Mary, your answer for the Wuss threw him off his game. Shame on you. He never would have thought of it that way.

            We'll find him on the next thread.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by DAWUSS (August 13, 2008 3:56 pm ET)
               
            Ah OK, got it.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by wolf kotenberg (August 13, 2008 9:09 pm ET)
               
            flip-flop twice (or any multiple of two) you end up with the original theme. just keep count
            Report Abuse
    • Author by mary59 (August 13, 2008 2:34 pm ET)
         
      Figures don't lie, but liars figure.  it figures.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (August 13, 2008 2:43 pm ET)
         
      Amazing how they manipulate the data to hide Mccain's atrocious voting record including he holds a 60% plus  record for absenses. Chute, I can pick out a certain year where i was a really good kid and portray that as my record.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by shoes89 (August 13, 2008 3:56 pm ET)
         

      Yet again ... MM takes an article that is very unflattering to Sen. McCain and cherrypicks a fact buried in it.

      The casual reader will get the gist of the article, "Republican Trio Crosses Party Lines To Back Obama" and see that this is not good news for the senator.

      "Conservative misinformation"? Hardly!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (August 13, 2008 4:07 pm ET)
           

        Yet again - Shoes nitpicks a story in a vain attempt to make her side look good, fails miserably, and slithers away.

        Why don't you ever respond, Shoes? Are you chicken?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by Governor (August 13, 2008 4:09 pm ET)
           

        The WSJ did the cherry-picking, not MM.

         

        (off topic alert: another republican wacko has committed a terrorist attack on US soil: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/14/us/14arkansas.html?ref=politics)

        Report Abuse
        • Author by thomp.steve9098 (August 13, 2008 4:14 pm ET)
             
          Where in your link (or anywhere else) does it state that the gunman was a republican?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by tommy (August 13, 2008 5:54 pm ET)
               
            I am also not privy to that inside information concerning the gunman's political affiliation, like the Governor is, apparently.  Or did he just make that up????
            Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (August 13, 2008 6:07 pm ET)
                 
              Well, he didn't make up the shooting, that's for sure. The Dem party chairman, Bill Gwatney died. While it doesn't say why the guy did it you have to wonder why someone would specifically ask for the democratic party chairman and then proceed to kill him in cold blood. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out this is another right wing nut like the one who recently went on a shooting spree at a church because it had liberal views.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by tommy (August 13, 2008 6:10 pm ET)
                   
                It could be personal and nothing do with politics, geesh......trying to score a political point off of some tragedy is beneath contempt.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (August 13, 2008 6:14 pm ET)
                     
                  I'm gonna assume that if it does come out that it was for political reasons that you'll apologize for that remark. ;)
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by tommy (August 13, 2008 6:19 pm ET)
                       
                    The political affiliations of some nutcase, who in cold blood guns down somebody, is not a pressing issue for me, sorry.  
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Governor (August 13, 2008 6:37 pm ET)
                         

                      I'm not a Dem, so I've no political points to score, but if you can speculate that it was a shooting not based on politics, others can surely, and, in my opinion, be far more close to the truth in assuming it was a political hit. 

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by tommy (August 13, 2008 6:45 pm ET)
                           

                        You specifically called him a Republican with absolutely no factual basis, and you say you've no political point to score? 

                        Now that's one for the books, LOL!

                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Governor (August 13, 2008 6:48 pm ET)
                             
                          I specifically assume he's a Republican.  If I'm wrong, I'll admit it, and if right, I'll drop it.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by tommy (August 13, 2008 6:51 pm ET)
                               

                            It's shameless to even assume his political affiliation unless you're out to shamelessly score political points, which you did, and you are.

                            Shameful. 

                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Governor (August 13, 2008 6:55 pm ET)
                                 

                              And it's pathetic of you to try and score points as you pretend to give a shit.

                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by Governor (August 13, 2008 6:57 pm ET)
                                 
                              PS: we will learn that he's a member of the NRA and votes Republican.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by snoopy (August 13, 2008 9:48 pm ET)
                                   
                                The Associated Press has reported the shooting suspect as 50-year-old Timothy Dale Johnson of Searcy, Arkansas. No motive is known, but it is reported that moments after he fired shots at Gwatney, he told the building manager at the nearby Arkansas Baptist headquarters, "I lost my job."
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by Governor (August 14, 2008 2:56 pm ET)
                                     
                                  SEARCY, Ark. (AP) — The sheriff's office says a search of Arkansas gunman Timothy Dale Johnson's home turned up 14 guns, antidepressants, his last will and testament and a Post-It note that bore his victim's last name and a telephone number.
                                  Report Abuse
      • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (August 13, 2008 4:54 pm ET)
           

        Shoes,

        Media Matters did not cherry pick a "fact."

        Media Matters highlighted a piece of conservative misinformation.  That's what Media Matters does.

        It appears in this case that the reporters were too lazy to present the true facts, and merely repeated verbatim the sludge they were handed by the RNC stooges.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by shoes89 (August 13, 2008 5:17 pm ET)
             

          "RNC stooges" handed "sludge" to the NY Times for an article entitled "Republican Trio Crosses Party Lines To Back Obama"??

          I really, really doubt that.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by Max Dharma (August 13, 2008 5:00 pm ET)
         

      Republican National Committee (RNC) "criticized" Sen. Barack Obama "for, in its view, his lack of bipartisan accomplishments."

       

      Say it ain’t so!

       

      Hahaha!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (August 13, 2008 5:49 pm ET)
         
      Speaking of immigration, did you know that it's the immigrants to America, both legal and illegal, who are responsible for the rising CO2 emissions world wide? I'm shocked, I tell ya!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (August 13, 2008 6:02 pm ET)
         

      This is just too good to pass up. McSame's lobbyist, what a guy!

      Monday, August 11, 2008

      POWER HOUSE

      Super lobbyist, McCain donor and loathsome GOP figure Ed Rogers decided to talk to the Washington Post about Barack Obama last week:

      John McCain's celebrity ad was effective. It wasn't uncontroversial and it didn't please all the political scientists, but it sure got noticed, and it made Barack Obama overreact. Questions about Obama's desire for celebrity status will linger. He now has to be very careful about intersecting with Hollywood, pop culture and entertainment. Lee Atwater said the worst thing you can do in American politics is play to your negative stereotype. Well, Obama's negative stereotype now includes the idea that he may be a little too glitzy. (Speaking of negative stereotypes, when Obama was talking about the pictures of presidents on dollar bills, was he introducing the presumptuous notion that his face belongs on American currency? I wonder whom he thinks he should replace.)


      At least he was able to refrain from mentioning Obama's middle name while calling him "glitzy."

      In other news, NBC has just completed the pilot for their new show, POWER HOUSE. In the first episode, we get to see how Ed Rogers and his wife live in their "Republican Shangri-La" -- an 18-thousand square foot estate in McLean, VA.



      Looks just like my livingroom. We must have the same architect.



      The genuine cowhide toilet-seat cover really says "I shit you not" with class. The golden studs around it aren't the least bit ostentatious.

      And finally, we get to see why the lobbyists and hedonists with whom McCain has surrounded himself have proclaimed Americans to be a bunch of whiners:



      That's right. She's standing in front of rows of her designer shoes cutting up sheets of freshly printed U.S. dollar bills with a pair of scissors so she can use them as wrapping paper.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.