they both go too far, both exaggerate , both skirt around the truth. Its they way of politics now, you just have to Not watch the D*mn ads like me.

This is going to fall straight down party lines.

UnDave... Never!

I actually agree with Karl Rove.

This is coming from the Republican's own Karl Rove! He's not calling Obama out on these ads. Is anybody calling Obama out? No...just McCain and they admit fully to it.

GirlA, he did call out Obama. read the whole post

It amazes me how often people post without reading.

So Liberty, Karl Rove calls out both campaigns, and the headline we get from you is 'McCain Ads Go Beyond Truth'? Thanks for that. Really.

Yes, but the real issue was about McCain focusing on these UNTRUE attack ads.

I did read the whole post and Rove had to be the good Republican and find something to attack Obama with.

How is McCain learning to use the computer and unable to use the computer because of war injuries? Which is it?

Why is McCain only now learning to use the computer? My grandparents are over 80 and know how to use a computer.

I have an issue with McCain's statement on the View: when he was being questioned about him endorsing the ads that were proven to be exaggerated truths, he looked at the host and says "I endorse them because they are absolutely the truth".

SMH!

And what people fail to realize that its not the candidates who are putting out the ads, its their staffers. At least when Obama staffers put out crap, Obama reprimanded them. If McCain would have done a similar thing, I wouldn't have a problem with him because its a part of politics. But the man said the smears were true! Slander is illegal!

"Rove told Fox News Sunday that both have gone too far. "

So both campaigns have gone too far, not one, both. If you want to pick that way, GirlA, we could say that Rove wanted to "appear fair and balanced", so he picked something minor from the McCain campaign. This doesn't help, and is actually more divisive than the ads themselves.

Only if the slander is a lie. When it's the truth, it's not a slander.

McCain has problems lifting his arms up for a long period of time, and typing for long periods. Thus he never really was computer literate and is trying to be now, despite the pain it causes.

Here you go HF.

How was your weekend?

Undave...What was true about McCain's ads? I want to know this, and I would like to see factual data to back it up.

Thanks.

It was busy.

Standard conservative response to any charge: everybody's doing it, everybody does it. It's all equal. You read it here all the time. It's childish and deflects discussion to level of playground back and forth. And to Rove, anything that keeps people from actually thinking more deeply about an issue is good.

I just can't get past the fact that Karl Rove thinks a campaign went too far. Too much to handle on a Monday!

Haha, Mandy, I'm with ya. Brain overload right now...

There are ways to equip a computer so that he doesn't have to strain his arms, you don't hear Stephen Hawking whining!

Steph, is that sort of nastiness really necessary?

HF - I'm glad to hear it was busy, and I hope it was a good busy.

Ladychaos - What part of the McCain ads were false? What parts of the Obama ad "McCain is going to be another George Bush" are true? What aspect of the "McCain voted with GB 90% of the time" is true? On that last one, it's only true if you look at the time perios between 2001 and late 2002. So, to imply that McCain voted with Bush at that percentage throughout the entire presidency is false.

I think because there is so much back and forth between posters here (myself included) we should all go to http://www.factcheck.org and get the facts. If we post "facts", the I suggest posting our source(s).

this will be the only thing i will say on the computer issue, i just bought my son who has cerebral palsy a touch screen computer maybe mccain should consider this it is awesome we just got it this weekend, it actually is very good on his hands that was affected the most by the CP

Stephley, I am sure if John McCain was standing in front of you , you wouldnt tell inform him of stephen hawkings obvious superior way of dealing with pain.

good lord people, hate him if you will it just makes you look bad.

It's great that we now have that technology.

and i was not being snarky at all, i wonder if there is a way to inform mccain im sure with all the money he has he will get something even more advanced than a touch screen

Well there ARE ways to use a computer these days without having to type much but I don't think it is that important compared to other things.

What I am concerned about is that I am agreeing with Karl Rove. I am scared.

it is awesome undave we played all night saturday

Yeah just like hating Obama makes Obama-haters look bad.

Step -- you hit the nail on the head!

She hit the nail on the head with her first comment or when she made fun of a veteran's injuries?

Don't be worried Geebers. It just means you're finally seeing the light

I'm guessing ds is commenting on this which was ACTUALLY stephs first comment.

"Standard conservative response to any charge: everybody's doing it, everybody does it. It's all equal. You read it here all the time. It's childish and deflects discussion to level of playground back and forth. And to Rove, anything that keeps people from actually thinking more deeply about an issue is good."

HF, that's why I asked whether she was agreeing with that first statement or the next, less agreeable, statement.

Undave...funny how John McCain is seen in the video saying that he agreed with Bush 90% of the time. HIS WORDS.

As for smears: McCain takes snippets from quotes Obama says, uses them out of context and turns them into something they are not. The biggest example of this is the "pig wearing lipstick" quote. This can also be found in the sex ed to kindergartners thing as well.

(forgive me for my lack of vocabulary...its Monday morning)

My point: Obama and McCain both use snippets of each others quotes and use them as fuel to the fire through embellishments. However, when McCain does it, he takes it from mere stretching to completely lying and making hugely false accusations.

Rove brought up the computer thing to bring up the POW thing AGAIN and make Obama look bad, thus deflecting attention from McCain's serious lies about Obama - it's not mean to point out that people far more seriously afflicted than McCain handle computers just fine -

McCain has no problem voting against helping wounded veterans or limiting their care, so yeah, I would tell him to his face to stop whining - no one was stingy with his care.

When did McCain or his camp say that his war injuries make him unable to use a computer? When I looked for this information I found this instead.

"Q: But do you go on line for yourself?

Mr. McCain: They go on for me. I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself. I don’t expect to be a great communicator, I don’t expect to set up my own blog, but I am becoming computer literate to the point where I can get the information that I need – including going to my daughter’s blog first, before anything else.

Q: Do you use a blackberry or email?

Mr. McCain: No

Mark Salter: He uses a BlackBerry, just ours.

Mr. McCain: I use the Blackberry, but I don’t e-mail, I’ve never felt the particular need to e-mail. I read e-mails all the time, but the communications that I have with my friends and staff are oral and done with my cell phone. I have the luxury of being in contact with them literally all the time. We now have a phone on the plane that is usable on the plane, so I just never really felt a need to do it. But I do – could I just say, really – I understand the impact of blogs on American politics today and political campaigns. I understand that. And I understand that something appears on one blog, can ricochet all around and get into the evening news, the front page of The New York Times. So, I do pay attention to the blogs. And I am not in any way unappreciative of the impact that they have on entire campaigns and world opinion. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/us/politics/13text-mccain.html?_r=2&or...

Those words are an answering to a question of those charges in an interview. His actual statment was: "My opponent says 'I've voted with President Bush over 90% of the time, ..." The Obama camp has taken a sound bite and replayed it enough times that everyone assumes it must be the truth, when there isn't much truth to it.

I don't believe he has ever "whined" about it. I think he's found ways to cope with it. Anyways, I just thought the amount of venom in that comment was unnecessary considering the circumstances.

Stephly - Did you hear McCain's reasoning for voting against that bill? According to McCain, it didn't do enough, he wanted more, and didn't want to pass something that he knew wouldn't do the job it was intended to. They took it back to commitee, and came up with a better, more comprehensive plan that he then voted for. What's the problem with that?

"They don't have to attack each other this way. They have legitimate points to make about each other."

This is precisely what I've been saying since the beginning of the primary. There is enough factual ammunition to go after each candidate on and to stoop to these tactics is unnecessary. Now when I said that way back when I got a lot of grief from people saying well that's how campaigns always are and there's nothing we can do about it. Well I beg to differ there is something we can do about it and that is not put up with it.

Haha, UnDave, you're blocking punches right and left.

"Rove brought up the computer thing to bring up the POW thing AGAIN and make Obama look bad, thus deflecting attention from McCain's serious lies about Obama - it's not mean to point out that people far more seriously afflicted than McCain handle computers just fine - "

This is so true Steph!

http://www.factcheck.org Fact check people. Here's the facts about that 90% ad:
Is it true John McCain voted with George Bush 95 percent of the time?
The Obama campaign keeps claiming McCain has voted with President Bush 95 percent of the time. Is this true? Is this significant?
A:

Yes, it's true, according to Congressional Quarterly's assessment of McCain's voting record.
Sen. Barack Obama has attempted to use the Arizona senator's voting record against him in statements like this:

Barack Obama (June 3): It's not change when John McCain decided to stand with George Bush 95 percent of the time, as he did in the Senate last year.

The claim is true. According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time – the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office – and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001).

Democrats are, of course, attempting to make the case that a vote for McCain is a vote to continue the policies of Bush, whose approval ratings are, to put it charitably, not a political asset for McCain.

Is 95% "Significant"?

As for whether voting with Bush 95 percent of the time last year is "significant," that's a matter of opinion that we leave to readers to determine for themselves.

When doing so, they may wish to consider that Obama's votes were in line with the president's position 40 percent of the time in 2007. That shouldn't be terribly surprising. Even the Senate's Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, voted with Bush 39 percent of the time last year, according to the way Congressional Quarterly rates the votes.

The McCain campaign points out that Obama told a local TV interviewer recently that "the only bills that I voted for, for the most part, since I've been in the Senate were introduced by Republicans with George Bush." Obama was actually wrong about that. In 2006 he voted alongside the president 49 percent of the time, and in 2005, the year before Democrats took control of the Senate, Obama voted with the president only 33 percent of the time.

Also, Obama voted in line with fellow Senate Democrats 97 percent of the time in 2007 and 2005, and 96 percent of the time in 2006, according to CQ.

And so . . .

So to sum up, McCain has indeed voted to support the unpopular Bush 95 percent of the time most recently, but less so in earlier years. And Obama has voted pretty close to 100 percent in line with fellow Democrats during his brief Senate career.

So Undave, what did McCain mean by that? Did he say he was going to stop doing so? Did he say that he's had a change of heart? Or did he just say that in support of Bush, who endorsed him, just like the people who held him captive?