Comments (17) | Add a comment
Titus stands behind campaign ads
-
JOHN LOCHER/LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., listens to Dennis Soukup, chairman of the Department of Applied Technologies at the College of Southern Nevada, during a tour of the Henderson campus this week. » Buy this photo
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Updated: Sep. 10, 2010 | 8:40 a.m.
Criticism that ads from her campaign and independent supporters are misleading doesn't faze Rep. Dina Titus.
Titus, D-Nev., is considered among the most vulnerable incumbents in the House of Representatives as she seeks to fend off a challenge from Republican Joe Heck, a physician, Army reservist and former state senator.
In doing so, Titus and her supporters have run television ads attacking Heck that contain claims and use selective editing tactics nonpartisan observers have declared misleading.
On Wednesday Titus said she stands behind the ads in question, which could be a factor in the outcome of the 3rd Congressional District race polls show is a statistical tie.
"I certainly do," said Titus in response to whether she stood behind ads , including one that used a truncated quote from Heck to make it appear as if he is against job creation.
Heck made the statement on the show Nevada Newsmakers.
The ad uses a clip of Heck saying, "The role of Congress is not to create jobs."
It doesn't continue as Heck finishes his statement by explaining his view that the role of Congress is to create an environment for private businesses to create jobs by keeping tax rates stable and regulations spare.
Nevada Newsmakers host Sam Shad said during an episode aired Wednesday that the clip was used out of context and that he asked Titus to take down the ad. The show is nonpartisan and doesn't advocate for or against candidates, he said.
Titus stood by her use of the clip when asked whether cutting off Heck's statement made the ad misleading.
"I don't see that as cutting off the clip," Titus said.
She continued: "The second part of his statement was a whole different point, it was some kind of mushy reiteration of the Bush mantra, which is lower taxes and less regulation. That doesn't have anything to do with 'create jobs' so I stand by it."
Titus stood by other contested claims as well, including those in an ad produced by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees that claimed Heck is "dangerous to women."
The claim is based in part on the suggestion Heck "voted against cancer vaccine," which isn't true.
Heck didn't vote against a cancer vaccine, he voted against a requirement that insurance companies cover a particular brand of vaccine for HPV, a precursor to cervical cancer.
"It is not even misusing what I said," Heck said after the ad was released. "It is totally changing what I said."
Titus hedged when asked about the specific claim that Heck is dangerous to women.
"You can make your own decision about that," she said. "But I certainly stand by the fact he voted against the bill to have insurance companies cover a vaccine for a virus that causes cervical cancer. He was opposed to it."
The nonpartisan political watchdog site FactCheck.org called the cancer claim and "dangerous to women" line in the union ad an example of "over-the-top" rhetoric.
FactCheck also criticized as false a claim that signers of an anti-tax pledge from Americans for Tax Reform agreed to "tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas." The pledge, signed by Heck, is a broad promise to keep taxes at or lower than current levels, and doesn't mention specific tax breaks, credits, incentives or jobs.
Titus said since Americans for Tax Reform has opposed tax breaks Democrats say encourage moving jobs overseas, Heck's signature on the pledge from the group justifies the claim.
But FactCheck.org contends justification for the claim from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee doesn't hold water because the loophole in question relates to foreign havens from U.S. taxes, not jobs, and adds that other elements of the tax code that provide incentive for moving jobs overseas have a negligible effect on U.S. jobs.
The incentive for politicians to use misleading ads is strong, said Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at the University of Michigan.
Nyhan has studied misleading political claims and found that once people believe incorrect information they are unlikely to change their views, even when presented with facts to rebut the inaccurate statements.
"Our research suggests that it is very difficult to correct misleading claims," Nyhan said. "When people want to believe something, even if it is not true, it is hard to convince them otherwise."
With the economy in shambles and the Democratic majority facing stiff political challenges in 2010, Nyhan says the environment is ripe for more misleading political ads.
"The endangered incumbents are going to spend their money, they don't have a winning positive message right now," Nyhan said. "If you don't have a winning positive message, you try to individualize the race and go as negative as you can. In a lot of cases the problem is it is not just negative, it is misleading and negative."
Contact reporter Benjamin Spillman at bspillman@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3861.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
This woman, along with Reid and Obama, will say anything to get re-elected. She has no record worth bragging so she runs as far away from it as possible. Heck, give her the boot.
US poverty on track to post record gain in 2009
By HOPE YEN and LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writers Hope Yen And Liz Sidoti, Associated Press Writers – Sat Sep 11, 2:13 pm ET
WASHINGTON – The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.
Census figures for 2009 — the recession-ravaged first year of the Democrat's presidency — are to be released in the coming week, and demographers expect grim findings.
It's unfortunate timing for Obama and his party just seven weeks before important elections when control of Congress is at stake. The anticipated poverty rate increase — from 13.2 percent to about 15 percent — would be another blow to Democrats struggling to persuade voters to keep them in power.
Interviews with six demographers who closely track poverty trends found wide consensus that 2009 figures are likely to show a significant rate increase to the range of 14.7 percent to 15 percent.
Should those estimates hold true, some 45 million people in this country, or more than 1 in 7, were poor last year. It would be the highest single-year increase since the government began calculating poverty figures in 1959.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100911/ap_on_bi_ge/us_poverty_in_america
Change. Oh yes they did. VOTE
Michael Green, teacher, CSN, colleague of Dina says..
"...that the public is not stupid enough to think"
Amazing contempt for people who VOTE and work and live with the consequences of the protected class...
These people who ascended to power some 19 months ago apparently live in the old DC comics land of Bizarro World (also known as Htrae).
In the Bizarro world of "Htrae" ("Earth" spelled backwards), society is ruled by the Bizarro Code which states "Do the opposite of all normal things!"
VOTE for me but I do what I want anyway--
RAISE taxes so I spend money you make on what I want--
BLAME people not in power for actions of those that are--
PREACH tolerance while calling others racist--
There was a book called "Animal Farm" where this was called "doublespeak" up is down down is up..
VOTE THEM OUT
no more--
"Because you are stupider than the entire Bizarro political establishment we want you to run things!".
A great compliment in "Bizarro World"--not here.
Titus is using the same deceptive tactics that Harry Reid is using in their campaign ads. Both are dubbing clips of tapes from various speechs to make it sound like their candidates are against a cause. No one is going to do away with Social Security or Medicare. BOth Titus and Reid did cut Medicare by $400 million to help fund Health Care Reform. Both Titus and Reid are bias, they agreed to help City Center but let the Fountainbleu drown, they help certain homeonwers but let many go into foreclosure, they help pass job bills, but those jobs were for only union workers. It doesn't sound like Titus and Reid is helping everyone, they are selecting who to help, which are the special interest and unions who have donated heavily to their campaign. We need policticans that will help everyone, not just those special interest. We need Heck and Angle for the big fight ahead, taxes. We cannot afford any kind of tax increase right now, but the democrats have put the nation in such a hole, they see no way out. Vote for Heck and Angle, they are the right choice for the right time which is now. Stop Obama runaway spending traing.
Joe Heck IS CLINT WEBB!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ5cGYBV2TQ
Alvinjh - I got the same letter!! She said '..I was pleased to support the 'Affordable Health Care for America Act' on November 7th. She even mentions that it will 'Reduce the deficit by $32 Billion over the next tens years'. That is not even 2.5% of this years projected deficit of $1.3 Trillion. Waiting for her commercials telling us 'HOW PLEASE SHE IS TO SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION'!!
Dina--we don't pay much attention to you in the comments-we are answering your mentor and holding him up to scrutiny before an angry electorate.
But-just so you know--while were in that booth kicking him out-you are leaving as well.
Count on it. You too--are DONE Dina.
(Still have the response to my letter 8 weeks after you ignored my repeated pleas to not vote for that monstrous health bill..I'm saving it--gonna frame it along with the post election day results.)
Michael Green wrote on September 10, 2010 08:42 AM:
Sentinel, I am grateful every day that Dina Titus replaced Jon Porter, and I hope for your sake and the sake of this community that the public is not stupid enough to think that Joe Heckuvajobbrownie, the second coming of George W. Bush and Sharron Mangle, would serve anybody but himself and his rich and hateful friends. Dina Titus represents US."
REALLY? You can't honestly believe that. Not once did she vote against Pelosi. Dina Titus is a coward just like Harry Reid and will ONLY vote the way she's told to by her party. The only thing she's good at is voting the way she's ordered to and ignoring her constituents.
Dina Titus has never run her own business, always having been a leftist academician. Moreover, her doctrinaire, Marxist arrogance and defiance in the face of economic realities makes her unfit to represent us in Congress. No doubt she is a pawn of the Leftist Service Employees International Union, the Leftist National Education Association, and other powerful Leftist groups in her district.
Much depends upon the Nevada Electorate's understanding of economic realities, to see the urgent necessity to unseat Titus.
Titus' Political Science Professorship at UNLV ought to expose her as a subversive suspect in undermining our Nation's security and future, because Political Science is a Marxist subject.