by hilzoy
Over at the Washington Monthly, Steve Benen notes a Washington Post fact-check that equates these claims:
(1) Joe Biden said that "In the Senate, John[McCain] has voted with President Bush 95 percent." In fact, he voted with Bush 95% of the time in 2007, but his average over the entire Bush presidency is 90%, which the WaPo says is "significantly lower".
(2) Sarah Palin's claim that she said "thanks but no thanks" to the Bridge to Nowhere. The WaPo describes her as "overstating her opposition" to the bridge.
Steve Benen asks: "Why lump them both together as "questionable claims"?"
As it happens, there is an answer to this question, which was revealed to publius in a vision several years ago. (This is one of my favorite of his old posts, so I can't resist giving it a shout-out.) The whole post is worth reading -- after all, it reveals secrets known only to initiates into the arcane mysteries of the Washington Post -- but here's a taste:
"As soon as I stood up, the stream started bubbling more intensely, forming a white foam on its surface. Up from the foam of the waves, a giant seashell emerged with David Broder on it - naked - with ivy wrapped around his head. (...)"What is this place, naked David Broder?"
"This is the Washington Post editorial board room. Everything is in balance. All is in harmony with the universe."
But just then, the peaceful musical bliss was interrupted by a voice echoing across the sky. It said:
Bush’s Social Security plan is a bad one. . . bad one . . . (echoing)
Suddenly, I heard a terrible grinding of metal. It sounded like a car was being crushed and digested by a trash compactor. At first, I couldn't tell where the awful screeching and grinding was coming from, but then I saw. To my amazement, I looked up and saw a massive set of scales - the type of scales that statues of blinded women outside courthouses hold. And the set of scales was huge - probably the size of an urban skyscraper. When the voice in the sky spoke, the scales had started moving, causing the screeching sound. Then I heard another voice coming from somewhere close. It was equally loud:
The Democrats have no plan. They are equally to blame. (echoing)
With that, the scales stopped moving and returned to a state of balance. Long-haired women resumed their music. Children laughed again. All was calm in the Washington Post editorial board room.
"What was that, naked David Broder?"
"This is why I have brought you here - to reveal my wisdom and our burden. You see, we here in the Washington Post editorial room are the guardians of the Great Scales of Objectivity. They must remain balanced at all times. Equally balanced."
"Or what?"
"Or everyone's head will explode.""
Truly, it is an awesome burden that the editorial writers of the Washington Post have to bear. The unenlightened see them as hacks, but in fact they and they alone keep the cosmos in balance. Few among us could bear the weight of such a burden without crumbling. Read, and thank the gods that you have not been asked to share their fate.
best post title ever - :)
thanks - i had forgotten about this one. this was the helter skelter era of LF apparently.
Posted by: publius | September 07, 2008 at 01:21 PM
You may have forgotten about it. But ever since I first read it, there's a whole genre of false equivalency editorials that cause the image of naked David Broder on a half-shell to appear in my mind.
It's like having some awful Madonna song lodged in your head.
That's a lot to answer for. ;)
Posted by: hilzoy | September 07, 2008 at 01:27 PM
That was a good post. How come he doesn't write posts like that at ObWi?
;-)
Posted by: Gary Farber | September 07, 2008 at 03:35 PM
Gary, I present to you:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/04/the-lincoln-dou.html
Posted by: Jason Williams | September 07, 2008 at 03:45 PM
publius, I hope you're still not smarting over Andrew Sullivan's slap.
He did that Koffman award thing, or whatever, because in his heart of hearts he knows your pen is at least his equal.
no cite, Gary. sorry.
Posted by: redwood | September 07, 2008 at 05:11 PM
Dear publius:
Scarred. For. Life.
yrs sncrly,
ME
Posted by: Doctor Science | September 07, 2008 at 05:21 PM
Gary, I present to you:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/04/the-lincoln-dou.html
The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858 (Slight Return)
Fixed that for you. *eg*
Posted by: jesurgislac | September 07, 2008 at 05:22 PM
The fact-check imbalance is even worse than you describe, because Obama himself said "90%" -- I remember, because it led into the joke that he personally didn't want to take a 10% chance on change.
But I guess if the WaPo used that version everyone's head would explode. Mine sure would.
Posted by: The Crafty Trilobite | September 07, 2008 at 06:03 PM
The mainstream media should look into the allegations of Palin's extramarital affair:
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3ne.htm
Oh, I almost forgot - only Democrats have their extramarital affairs splattered all over the mainstream media. Like John Edwards, who is a private citizen and is not running for any public office.
Posted by: The Conservative Deflator | September 07, 2008 at 10:45 PM
The mainstream media mostly ignored it when reported by the National Enquirer in Edwards' case too. For good reason.
Posted by: The Crafty Trilobite | September 07, 2008 at 11:02 PM
True, Trilobite, but then I don't think Edwards sent his spokesman out to talk to the press about the National Enquirer story and threaten legal action. The fact that McCain did indicates to me that the campaign has decided to essentially spread the more tawdry rumors themselves as much as possible, to help build up resentment against the media and make it easier to dismiss any more legitimate stories being reported.
Posted by: KCinDC | September 07, 2008 at 11:15 PM
The CD: I have no doubt that they are looking into it. When someone comes up with evidence, I will take note of it. Until then, the Edwards scoop has not completely destroyed my distrust of the National Enquirer. Although I am indebted to it for the fact that my cats now understand, sort of, the phrase: "Inquiring kittens want to know!"
Posted by: hilzoy | September 07, 2008 at 11:16 PM
For God's Sake, Hilzoy!
I know you're trying to make a point... but did you have to put the image of a naked David Broder into my head?
Posted by: Anthony Damiani | September 07, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Could you please ask readers to contact ABC and insist on a Palin interview with real substance. American voters deserve it.
Posted by: TBone | September 08, 2008 at 12:07 AM
Hey, Publius! I linked to you.
Posted by: Gary Farber | September 10, 2008 at 09:15 PM