Tuesday, April 30, 2013
In his recent campaign commercials and public statements, Mark Sanford has issued three particular premises that I know to be factually incorrect. Specifically:
1) No union attempted to close, shut down or take jobs away from Boeing’s North Charleston facility. The IAMAW in Everett, Washington did file a complaint about the company, but in its filing specifically stated that it did not seek any of the jobs from the new North Charleston facility, and also publicly stated that it would not accept any of those jobs in settlement.
Documentation that confirms the falsehood of Sanford’s allegations is publicly accessible.
2) The Colbert Busch campaign has not received any donations from Nancy Pelosi, nor from Rep. Pelosi’s political action committee.
Public records available from the Federal Election Commission confirm that the Sanford campaign’s claims on this matter are also incorrect.
3) Sanford’s claims that Pelosi is “anti-Boeing” also appear to be false, and based on the fact that Boeing’s PAC donated $10,000 to Pelosi’s re-election campaign in 2012 alone. Were the congresswoman actually be “anti-Boeing,” as the Sanford campaign claims, the corporation would not have donated so much to aid Pelosi’s re-election last year.
These records are also publicly accessible.
I request that Sanford and his campaign retract those statements, and cease from their continued distribution.
I also would like to remind voters that “Truth in Advertising” laws have little applicability in political ads, and allow such blatant falsehoods to be purveyed without penalty.
After the May 7 election, perhaps that technicality should be the focus of public attention.
The Journal Scene is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not The Journal Scene.