VOTE 2010: NRCC targets Mike McIntyre over Social Security

St. Petersburg Times
PolitiFact.com

Scaring voters about what could happen to Social Security if your opponent wins the election is a time-honored tradition in political ads, especially when Democrats are making the accusation. But in something of a twist, the National Republican Congressional Committee -- the campaign arm of House Republicans -- is using Social Security as a cudgel against a Democrat, seven-term Rep. Mike McIntyre of North Carolina.

Here's the transcript of the ad:

Narrator: "Mike McIntyre and Nancy Pelosi are not being honest with North Carolina seniors."

McIntyre: "I'll never risk your Social Security."

Narrator. "But McIntyre and Pelosi's big spending is robbing our Social Security trust fund. Social Security is billions in debt, and this year will be operating in the red. And now for the second year in a row, there's no cost-of-living increase for North Carolina seniors. Mike McIntyre and Nancy Pelosi: Their spending is putting our Social Security at risk."

We've written at some length about the question of whether Social Security is "billions in debt" and "operating in the red." So this time, we thought we'd tackle the notion that McIntyre and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. -- the ad's boogeyman and boogeywoman -- are responsible for the fact that "for the second year in a row, there's no cost-of-living increase for North Carolina seniors."

We'll begin by pointing out that North Carolina seniors aren't alone in this fate. Social Security cost-of-living adjustments, or COLAs, are calculated on a national basis, not by individual state.

But how are they calculated? Here's the long answer.

THANKS, POLITIFACT.COM! TO READ THE REST OF THIS STORY, CLICK HERE:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/oct/29/national-...

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

I ( Ginny ) a Democrat, is voting for Pantano
I ( Eddie ) an indepenent is voting for Pantano
WWAY3 POST OUR RANTS
WWAY3 are you for the The Germocrats
We'll find a new tv channel to watch
WWAY3 is TRASH

And the Truth shall set you free...
See ya mike,
don't let the door hit ya
Where the good lord split ya

Thank you WWAY for waiting until 3 days before the election to provide us with this anti-Pantano propaganda. It's nice to know that even the local news arm is still part of the clueless mainstream biased media. Had you run this several days or weeks ago, there would be time to rebut and elaborate...but...nope! 3 days before voting is highly suspicious & we see you for what you are!

I had a degree of confidence in Mike until he used this time un-honorable ad about Social Security. Anyone with a degree of mental ability knows that the SS program must be revised or it's credibility is done for. There ain't anyway for it to continue as a Ponzi Scheme.

Following Mike's ad, I voted for Pantano. I really didn't think Mike would stoop that low. But, hey! It's politics at its worst. When politicians get desperate, they always try fear. Well, it lost Mike one vote. People aren't stupid. They have seen this old trick during every election in the past twenty years.

I am a senior citizen who depends upon SS for most of my living. It can't go on much longer without a complete overhaul. Mike knows it or he's stupid. Stupid, he ain't. Scared properly describes him at this point. I am disappointed in him. He should know better--and he does know better. He has tried to destroy his opponent's credibility and lost his own.

This ad is running right now on our local channels. And it is a blatant lie that McIntyre has anything to do with the lack of a COLA for social security recipients. So are you saying that you don't mind the Pantano ad lying, but you do mind that someone has pointed it out? If the political ads would restrict themselves to the truth, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I think the thing that you should be questioning as "highly suspicious" is that your candidate would allow someone to run an ad for him that is completely false. Shows his character, in my opinion. Unfortunately, lying and distorting the facts is a part of politics, and candidates from all parties do it. Disgraceful.

Did you really just suggest that politicians be truthful? So tell me, what's life like in "Wonderland"?