When my best friend told me she was going to spend the end of August in Maine, I felt suddenly that my resolution to monitor the two political conventions was a responsible one. How wrong I proved to be: no doubt two weeks spent away from the mass media would have been much more rewarding than savoring the political landscape as I did. The least I can do to make my “vacation” worthwhile is to transcribe a few of the fallacies and suspicious statements I’ve heard in recent weeks.

Take the case of Jose E. Serrano, a charismatic Congressman from New York who said in Denver that Bronx is the poorest district located in the “richest city in the world.” But measured by personal net earnings, New York did not even make the global top ten last year. Did Mr. Serrano mean to make a more modest U.S.-limited comparison, perhaps? A 2005 Forbes rating by the highest median household income reveals that neither New York nor Los Angeles are among the ten richest cities, even in the United States.

Andrew Tobias, Democratic Party Treasurer, gave a passionate speech that could have been a highlight of the convention. But when he said: “In just the last eight years, the Republicans have cut the value of the U.S. dollar almost in half,” my neck got another workout.

Political parties—I pray their members know—do not set the value of the dollar (which is a floating currency). Presidents only appoint a Chairman of the Federal Reserve who has (limited) control over the interest rates. Those rates influence the dollar’s value—as does demand from abroad. In the end, a prolonged and unsustainable trade deficit is more to blame for the weakening of American currency than any one president.

Mr. Tobias was also one of several speakers who freely associated Republican policies with the image of bigwigs flying around in private or corporate jets. Such implications made me wonder whether these speakers read the memoir of the candidate they are so enthusiastically supporting. The Democratic nominee himself does not appear to share the outspoken belief of many delegates that using a private jet is shameful—in fact, there is a well-written passage in The Audacity of Hope where Barack Obama describes just what makes flying in a private jet so enjoyable. Since this man was offered the nomination for president, maybe his party could recognize with him that wealth and vice are not synonyms.

The other convention in Minneapolis had its own eyebrow-raising moments. You may think equating opposition to a war with some fanciful will to surrender is a trick so old it must be collecting dust away from the top levels of American politics. If so, Senator Lindsey Graham proved you wrong, when he announced: “Barack Obama’s campaign is built around us losing in Iraq.” It may be a red-meat line to the base, but this is certainly not a fact.

Once again, the media proved their inclination to pursue maximum readership, throwing to the wind the relevance and propriety of the information they provide. But I’m used to some outlets resisting gossip more than others. As the Republican convention started, even The New York Times’ headlines included words like “Family Problem,” “Palin’s Daughter Pregnancy” and “Disclosures on Palin Raise Questions.” Top journalists were splitting hairs about the extent of McCain’s knowledge about Palin—but the only questions successfully raised were those about the renewal of my subscription.

Worst of all are the laughable hypocrisies American politicos force themselves into as they try to be all things to all people. The panel on A. J. Hammer’s CNN program spent more than seven convention minutes complaining about the fact that Palin’s style is becoming a hot topic. “Isn’t it sad that we always judge women by how they look?” Lisa Bloom, a panelist, said, seemingly oblivious to her own role in that phenomenon (the bottom of the screen read “Sarah’s Style!”).

Many journalists, when not pinpointing market failures, capably supply what sells big, and politicians know few things better than devising and repeating popular messages. I guess it can’t hurt to be attentive to the news before a major change in leadership in this country. But part of me is sure I should have bought the early ticket to Maine, and skipped out on the charade.

Jan Zilinsky ’09, a Crimson editorial editor, is an economics concentrator in Mather House.