Truth distorted in US elections

Having worked at a number of US newspapers inside and outside the United States for some years, I have come to admire, among other things, the US way of "looking someone in the eye and talking straight".

This, more than any other national manner, has had a big influence not only on my writing style but also my personality. I thought I could understand, although not necessarily endorse, the strong protests that US politicians have made against what they perceive, rightly or wrongly, to be others' deceptive attempts to take advantage of their country.

For that reason, I was all the more surprised and disappointed at reading about the dark side of politics revealed by the presidential campaigns being run by the two main US political parties.

Deception appears to be the order of the day, especially if one judges by the public speeches that some politicians have made and by the messages contained in multimillion dollar advertising campaigns run by the Republican and Democratic parties.

All of this has prompted various news commentators to ask if facts matter any more in US politics. The answer is, "apparently not".

A recent article in the New York Times carried the headline: "Campaigns Play Loose With Truth in a Fact-Check Age". The story cited one Republican Party ad that contained a clip of President Barack Obama saying, "If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose."

As it turns out, the words were a quote of something Senator John McCain of Arizona had said when he was running for the presidency on the Republican ticket in 2008. Put back in their original context, Obama's words were, "Senator McCain's campaign actually said, and I quote, 'If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose.'"

According to the Times' story, the ad was given a "Pants on Fire" rating by the Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking website PolitiFact.com. And that's only one of many instances in which the truth has been bent in this presidential campaign.

The Democrats aren't innocent either. The Times' article points out that they keep dwelling on a quote that, taken out of context, makes it sound as if the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, enjoys firing people. Elsewhere, the article discusses an Obama campaign commercial that falsely suggests that Romney is opposed to the use of abortion in cases of rape or incest.

"Recent events - from the misleading statements in convention speeches to television advertisements repeating widely debunked claims - have raised new questions about whether the political culture still holds any penalty for falsehood," says the article.

The obvious contempt for facts seen in US politics was exemplified by a widely quoted comment attributed to Neil Newhouse, pollster for the Romney campaign, who said, "We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers."

Watching from afar, we can't help wondering if US politicians allow their foreign policy to be even guided by facts. We are also curious about how much influence this tendency to bend the truth has had on stances the US has taken in trade and territorial disputes.

Asian economies are particularly worried that the US' sputtering economic recovery and Europe's worsening financial troubles will lead to more frequent trade disputes. As incomes continue to decrease in many Western countries, public discontent could force governments in those places to find excuses to curb imports.

Many excuses for protectionism have been founded on half-truths and twisted facts and have ignored the benefits that come from being able to import inexpensive goods. A refusal to stick to the facts will only result in trade disputes that are devoid of all fairness.