The Truth Hurts

CandA · Site Admin Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 22

"Shame on you, Barack Obama." This was Hillary Clinton's response to two Obama campaign mailings, one of which pointed out her proposed policy of mandating individuals to obtain health insurance or face penalties, the other suggesting that Clinton has a record of supporting NAFTA, a trade agreement that is quite unpopular among blue-collar workers in Ohio.

These mailings were not, however, dishonest or misleading in any way. Clinton does in fact support a Universal Health Care plan which would, as the Obama campaign put it, "force" Americans to purchase health insurance, and she has made statements in the past seemingly in support of NAFTA.

Although she may not like to hear the truth without the Clinton spin, these are indeed the facts. Mike Huckabee similarly criticized Mitt Romney's campaign ads, in which the former Arkansas Governor's record was factually presented, as "dishonest."

Rather than attempt to 'talk around' and avoid the elements of their record and proposals which they themselves find embarrassing enough to label any presentation thereof as dishonest or misleading (despite them being completely factual), candidates would be better off explaining in-depth both the positive and negative aspects of their record and each federal policy and program they propose to the American public, and let the voters then judge the fitness of each candidate on the facts, without the spin.

It is a shame that a candidate would support a policy which they believe would only earn public approval if presented from one angle. Nevertheless, politicians seeking votes consistently hide from and make lame excuses for short-comings and bad policies, afraid to let the people hear the truth.