In a May 14 Washington Post article, staff writers Jonathan Weisman and Michael D. Shear wrote: “Republican surrogates have relentlessly tried to portray [Sen. Barack] Obama as anti-Israel, just this week plucking one sentence out of an extended interview with the Atlantic Monthly to accuse him of calling Israel 'a constant sore' that infects U.S. foreign policy.” But Republicans did not “pluck[] one sentence” out of the Atlantic interview; they plucked out two words, and Weisman and Shear did not provide the context in which Obama used the words “constant sore” to show readers that the attack is false. Indeed, in his May 12 interview with Atlantic magazine national correspondent Jeffrey Goldberg, Obama used the words “constant wound” and “constant sore” in referring to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not Israel. Further, Weisman and Shear did not note the Obama campaign's or Goldberg's responses to the Republican attacks, both of which noted they are false.

Indeed, Washington Post “fact checker” Michael Dobbs noted on May 14 that “a fair-minded reading of Obama's remarks shows that his comment has been taken completely out of context ... It is pretty clear from this passage that Obama is not calling Israel a 'constant wound.' Indeed, he specifically says 'no, no, no' when asked whether Israel is a drag on America's international reputation. He is referring to the overall Israeli-Palestinian problem, including continued Jewish settlements in occupied Palestinian territory.” Weisman and Shear did not mention Dobbs' “fact check.”

Additionally, Weisman and Shear wrote that Republican strategist Scott Reed said that "[p]ersonal attacks ... may work when times are good, but in an election year marked by economic recession, an unpopular war and an unpopular president, the candidate waging a frivolous campaign could face a backlash." As evidence, the Post cited “the sacking of McCain's convention chief, Douglas M. Goodyear, after his past ties to the military junta in Burma came to light.” But as Weisman and Shear themselves noted, Goodyear was “sack[ed]” for his ties to the “military junta in Burma,” not "[p]ersonal attacks" during a political campaign. Moreover, in purporting to note McCain's stance on personal attacks, Weisman and Shear did not report that the McCain campaign suspended a staff member who reportedly distributed a video -- titled "Is Obama Wright?" -- that, as the Politico's Jonathan Martin reported, “splices together the most inflammatory language of [Obama's former pastor] Jeremiah Wright with a series of other issues that have arisen in the campaign” and “includes footage of Malcolm X, the U.S. Olympians who raised their hand in the black power salute and the song 'Fight the Power.' "

Further, an April 24 article in The Hill reported that McCain asserted about a controversial ad by the North Carolina Republican Party attacking Obama and Democratic gubernatorial candidates Beverly Perdue and Richard Moore: “I'll do everything in my power to make sure not only they stop it but that kind of leadership is rejected.” The Hill added that McCain claimed “he has communicated his wishes 'in every possible way.' ” However, as the blog Think Progress noted, Linda Daves, chairwoman of the North Carolina GOP, asserted during an interview on the April 24 edition of NPR's All Things Considered that she had not had “a conversation with John McCain about” the ad. FoxNews.com reported on May 1 that McCain stated that “he wouldn't have run the GOP ad, 'but I am not going to referee, I am just going to run my own campaign.' ”

From the May 14 Washington Post article:

The McCain campaign has been less organized than Obama's in its efforts to counter the [527] groups, but the senator from Arizona has made clear his antipathy toward them -- without much effect.

“We will attack Obama viciously on all fair issues, whether they are national security, whether they are taxes or the economy,” promised Chris LaCivita, one of the Republican strategists behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group that attacked Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry in 2004. LaCivita added: “At the end of the day, every individual has a right to participate in the political process whether John McCain likes it or not. It's their constitutional right.”

But so far, such groups have been remarkably silent, in part because of the signals Obama and McCain have sent to donors to steer clear.

“Obviously, McCain would prefer that people give money to him and the RNC and let us run our own campaign,” said senior campaign adviser Charles R. Black Jr., referring to the Republican National Committee. “It's an issue of who is going to control your campaign.”

To be sure, that has not prevented spokesmen for either candidate from accusing the other side of negative campaigning. Democrats say McCain shattered the truce when he said Obama is the candidate of Hamas. Republican surrogates have relentlessly tried to portray Obama as anti-Israel, just this week plucking one sentence out of an extended interview with the Atlantic Monthly to accuse him of calling Israel “a constant sore” that infects U.S. foreign policy.

Obama himself blurred the lines last weekend in Oregon, when he suggested that McCain's association with the Keating Five savings and loan scandal in the 1980s would be fair game in the general-election campaign. Republicans say Obama and the Democratic National Committee distorted McCain's words and record with ads showing him saying he would be all right with U.S. troops remaining in Iraq for 100 years and praising the economic record of President Bush.

[...]

Conservative organizations say their donors have had no direct contact from the McCain campaign or its surrogates, but Republican operatives such as David Bosse and LaCivita, who have promised to hit Democrats hard, have so far been silent.

Instead, what operatives have seen is the firing of an Obama adviser, Samantha Power, for calling Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) “a monster,” and the sacking of McCain's convention chief, Douglas M. Goodyear, after his past ties to the military junta in Burma came to light.

Scott Reed, who managed Republican candidate Robert J. Dole's campaign in 1996, said those signals have been extraordinary -- and for good reason. Personal attacks such as George H.W. Bush's tarring of Michael S. Dukakis in 1988 as a weak-kneed, unpatriotic liberal may work when times are good, but in an election year marked by economic recession, an unpopular war and an unpopular president, the candidate waging a frivolous campaign could face a backlash.