- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 12, 2010 at 12:41 am #596656
JanSParticipantyou’ve all seen the TeeVee ad featuring the grocer in the store who talks about what this state is taxing, and what should be repealed. Here’s the skinny on 1107 from Ad watch…notice how “not true” this TeeVee ad is. Yet..people will hear it, and base their vote on it. Unconscionable!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013092669_candypoptaxneedle07m.html
just another of the many untruths out there :(
October 12, 2010 at 1:32 am #705517
anonymeParticipantJanS, thanks for bringing this up. I found the ads to be more than a little suspicious, and your link proves why. After watching the ads I began scrutinizing my grocery bill (always a good thing – PCC overcharged me $5 last week) and could never find a single taxed ‘food’ item, except for my once monthly luxury beer. This smear campaign reminds me of the one launched by the plastics industry against the bag fee/ban. What really bugs me is that the beverage lobby, like the plastics lobby, has again targeted a certain conscientious demographic that typically votes for eco-friendly options. In the case of plastics, they falsely claimed that Wal-Mart would be exempt from the fee; now the I-1107 folks are trying to make it appear that organics have been targeted – and taxed. Not so.
October 12, 2010 at 1:56 am #705518
JoBParticipantthanks for the link…
i am thinking a lot of candy makers are going to find some way to add flour to their product :)
October 12, 2010 at 2:09 am #705519
dhgParticipantRobert Mak provided some enlightenment: The claims that WA State foods are taxed while similar out of state foods are not refers to the BUSINESS TAX. By law, we can’t tax manufacturers out of state. So the idea that Nalley’s Chilli is being taxed is 100% specious.
October 12, 2010 at 2:19 am #705520
CarolPBMemberYes-thought Robert Mak’s report really set the record straight. I love that they refer to a NEW tax, when it’s really the same old state B & O tax! well under 1 % i might add!
October 12, 2010 at 2:21 am #705521
CarolPBMemberAnyone recognize the actor in that commercial? He looks familiar, so it has been bugging me! Sit-com from the 70’s perhaps?
October 12, 2010 at 10:04 pm #705522
digidollMemberThere are plenty of political ads out there that are completely false or at the minimum out-of-context misleading. A tax is a tax, whether it’s on a person or a business… it ends up coming out of an individual’s pocket in the end (through higher prices at the checkstand), and in this case the tax is singling out in-state businesses, big and small, and therefore WA residents.
Singling out the I-1107 ad is unnecessary, especially when the facts can be easily looked up – unlike highly-edited random video quotes of candidates saying something in response to an off-camera question. THAT truly is unconscionable.
It’s one thing if a TAX gets repealed because of voters not doing their research, but if a CANDIDATE loses because of misleading advertising, I’m not cool with it. There are no legislative end-runs second-guessing and muddying voter opinion on candidates after the election. That is reserved for clear YES/NO questions on the ballot (monorail, tunnel…).
October 12, 2010 at 10:09 pm #705523
JoBParticipantdigidoll…
so it’s ok to mislead people if you are talking about ending a tax … and in the case of I-1107 and Washington products that would be closing a B & O loophole that was exploited by some Washington companies…
but it’s not ok to mislead people if you are talking about a candidate?
interesting ethical interpretation there.
October 12, 2010 at 10:15 pm #705524
digidollMemberIf you read the whole post… candidates do not get the benefit of legislative end-runs to muddy (and ignore) voter opinion. It seems that any ISSUE we vote on gets plenty of that, clear advertising or not.
October 12, 2010 at 10:16 pm #705525
anonymeParticipantOctober 12, 2010 at 10:23 pm #705526
KBearParticipant“Singling out the I-1107 ad is unnecessary, especially when the facts can be easily looked up”
Since many people won’t bother to look up the facts, I think it’s absolutely necessary to draw attention to this.
October 12, 2010 at 11:27 pm #705527
JoBParticipantdigidoll…
i think congress tried one of those end runs last week.. sending a bill through at the last minute that would have made it impossible to sue a lender or repo organization who falsely filed repossession papers against you…
i am so guessing most of America isn’t for that one… Obama agreed and vetoed it.
when you have to mislead voters to get elected or to get an initiative passed… you probably don’t have a good cause to begin with.
people generally make pretty good decisions when given all of the info…
October 13, 2010 at 9:31 am #705528
HMC RichParticipantYes, people do make better decisions when they are informed.
October 13, 2010 at 8:02 pm #705529
JoBParticipantit really makes a difference if the information they are getting is accurate
October 13, 2010 at 10:52 pm #705530
JanSParticipantJoB, yes. I’m beginning to think, from the commercials that are on, that patty Murray is responsible for everything bad that has happened in the last 18 years, the economy, disease, global warming…everything. Nov. 02 can’t come soon enough!
October 14, 2010 at 7:14 pm #705531
lizruMemberOK folks, please. Do not count on TV ads for impartial election information. Really the wrong place to get information.
What’s your favorite place for accurate, unbiased information for making decisions in a democracy? In particular local decisions?
October 14, 2010 at 7:30 pm #705532
CarsonParticipantWhen it comes to the ballot measures the first place I look is who sponsored it. That alone tells you most of what you need to know. For example
1107 was sponsored by an out of state bottles assoc. Its an easy no
1082 was sponsored by the BIAW, in the past they have been Dino’s personal pit bulls, another easy no
anything by Eyman, an easy no.
October 14, 2010 at 8:02 pm #705533
JoBParticipantlizru..
i am not asking for impartiality in TV ads…
but even minimal accuracy would be greatly appreciated.
October 14, 2010 at 8:16 pm #705534
lizruMemberJoB, I still think you’re barking up the wrong tree if you’re looking for accuracy. These are the same people who sold us cigarettes!
October 16, 2010 at 3:37 pm #705535
anonymeParticipantThe ads promoting I-1107 have been intensifying over the past few weeks. The proof is now all around us that this is an enormous, multi-media, corporate-sponsored attack by the beverage industry and others. I’m now seeing Coca-cola semi-trucks plastered with “Yes on I-1107” as well as banner ads on almost every web page I visit. This is a HUGE amount of money being spent, and NOT by some poor little organic fruit bar company in Washington state. Follow the money…
October 16, 2010 at 6:15 pm #705536
JoBParticipantLying has become altogether too acceptable… period.
October 16, 2010 at 6:15 pm #705537
JanSParticipantI watch the commercial by the “organic snack bar” woman and I think…so throw a little flour in there…voila..no tax…geez. I want to slap these people and their “untruths”….
October 16, 2010 at 10:36 pm #705538
charlabobParticipantI have to say, I read the Stranger endorsements and rarely vary from them. (Yeah, the bob and I do a lot of our own research too.) I also notice who sponsors and who endorses: I pretty much can count on opposing anything Luke Esser and the R establishment endorse. (I’m on all their lists as a method of doing opposition research.)
Once in a while, I’m thrown off — eg, the Seattle Times’ endorsement of Patty Murray and Suzan DelBene baffles me, but I agree with them.
I agree with JoB; in an ideal world lying shouldn’t be part of the political landscape. However, I’m happy to say the Democrats seem to have at least grokked the concept of exaggeration.
The R’s have pretty much said what they’re going to do if they take over national or state control: bring government to a halt. Hold impeachment trials over Obama’s birth certificate. Put the guy who wanted to apologize to BP because we were rude to them after the oil spill in charge of energy policy. Give local schools the right to decide whether science is true or false. Michelle Bachman as House Speaker? The list is endless.
The result would be catastrophic and, for that reason, I still believe the sane R’s of my childhood are still lurking out there somewhere and won’t let their party be taken over by lunatics.
October 17, 2010 at 12:24 am #705539
JanSParticipantcharlabob..I saw the video of the guy going on and on about impeaching Obama over his birth certificate. And I sat here and thought..”what the hell alternate universe is he from”? shaking my head. It’s embarrassing to be in the same world as these people! I almost believe that the pods are hatching..
October 17, 2010 at 3:57 pm #705540
redblackParticipantjan: regarding flour, i think that’s one thing that has been contributing to the national increase in cases of gluten and wheat intolerance. my wife is one of those who can’t digest it easily, and has found that removing it from her diet has helped seemingly unrelated issues – like exercise-induced asthma.
but i’m still voting no on 1107.
lizru: i mostly get my information from the voter’s pamphlet, because i think it’s important to read the fine print.
if i need clarification, i’ll go to the stranger. say what you will about the merits of that publication, but their political reporting is often the best in the city for local issues.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.