McCain shows his true character and leadership

Ofcourse. What's your problem?

I didn't think I had a problem CI. To what exactly are you referring? I don't think I have written anything to which you should take offense, so I'm not sure why you're asking if I have a problem.

You're being disengenuous, CR, because beyond the simple measure of quantity, [McCain leads oodles in this category], the "quality" of McCain's lies show him to be highly unprincipled.

Your issue about lying by the two candidates belies your issue of honesty as you go forward with your vote for McCain. I have no problem, because I understand more than you do that McCain's lies outstrips Obama. It's a simple matter to Google "lies by McCain" or "lies by Obama."

It's that simple to learn the truth. There's also FactCheck to determine who's telling more lies.

You prefer to remain with your head in the sand like many conservatives on these political threads. That's your choice to remain ignorant as you vote; that's democracy.

Ah, I see. So now it doesn't matter if your guy lies, just as long as his lies are of less quality than the other guys'.

At least now we are getting to some common ground on this, because I do agree that a voter needs to consider which lies are intolerable to him/her, which lies are material to the individual voter in other words. That is indeed more important than how many. But again, that point simply backs up my contention that counting lies is a fool's game and totally meaningless once you admit that all pols will lie to gain votes.

...well, I was just going off of what your post seemed to be saying. I don't know you, and don't actually "know" anyone here, except for the posts I happen to come accross by the individual.

But I guess we use a different metering system to "sort through the rhetoric". If "all politicians lie" is a fact of the established system, frequencey and magnitude are important, and should be.

If the statement "all politicians lie" is a truism, then it's irrelevent whether they are dem, repub or independent. How much they lie and what they lie about obviously requires some consideration, rather than just being disregarded as the status quo.

If one candidate lies about how long he ran on the treadmill and the other lied about mobile weaopns labs, I think one needs to see that there exists no parity when it comes to lying.
"I sold a plane on ebay" is a rather benign lie. Pointless to lie in this case, but fairly benign. But if you see the candidate reveal themselves as an habitual liar, lying becomes part of their candidacy and will indicate how they will conduct business and liase with the public.

This, IMO, is part of what needs to be considered when determining if they are the best individual for the job. If lying is endemic, simply examining their positions on certain issues become moot.

But, I don't know you, or what you stand for.
Maybe lying really doesn't matter.
I just can't see how it can't.

And, since you seem not to have read a previous post of mine too well, I will repeat for your benefit. I have yet to decide who I am voting for in this election. I don't much relish McCain as president. I will honestly admit that. I have no desire whatsoever for Obama to be president. There are other choices on the ballot although admittedly they are not going to win whether they get my vote or not. (The other choices I mean.)

I will continue to weigh the issues and determine who I would like to see as president. If that is being ignorant, then so be it. I guess I'm ignorant. Of course, it seems you think anyone is ignorant who does not vote and see things as you do. This seems to be a widespread problem among democrats. Not all of them mind you. Some democrats actually are tolerant and capable of discussing without resorting to calling others names.

CR, There's no sense in discussing "candidate's lies" when you have no value on lies or its intent. When you accept lies without question, you end up being the victim of fraud, loss of anything of value you own, your marriage, your children, and your security. Hey, but that's your choice. How in the world do you keep any relationship with family and friends?

We don't "count" lies; that's not necessary because in politics there are many people and organizations that track candidate's lies. They also tell us what lies were spoken, and the truth or fact about the lies.

But since you don't care about the "quality" of lies, you'll continue to remain the "fool."

Lie 1: Your wife just slept with your best friend.
Lie 2: Your wife just bought a new outfit that cost $1500.
Lie 3: You slept with another woman.
Lie 4: Your son just robbed a bank.
Lie 5: Your son raped and killed a woman.

They all have the same quality?

Where is that? I'd like to visit this fantasy land...

Well, abandoning the Obama camp doesn't mean you seek shelter in the McCain tent.

....but I don't understand CR...you said earlier that you defended BPB's opposition to Obama because he didn't trust him. I do recall BPB saying that there were lies and inconsistencies that led him to that conclusion.
BPB, I would have thought, would have been a guaranteed Obama/Dem voter. I thought for a while that he was going to support him after Clinton was not nominated, but he did not. But he also hasn't leaped over to support McCain.
Your own example sort of defeats your own assertion.

If I were American and I saw Obama lying with the frequencey and degree of McCain/Palin, I'd be off that ship so fast. It just so happens that
1. I haven't seen any of the Obama lies. I'd be open to seeing some links from Factcheck.
2. Any inconsistencies from Obama have not swayed my support of him.

8 months ago, I was on the fence. I could have supported a McCain presidency in spite of having initially supported Hillary. she was pick #1, and the cards have unfolded in the way they have inasmuch as I now support Obama.

I hazard a guess there would be a lot of us who'd get off that ship if the Obama campaign was being conducted like the McCain/Palin campaign.

There were plenty who got off the Bush Bus when they saw him and his administration for what they were. It happens all the time.

Claiming than "none" of us would abandon Obama is a bit over the top.

Please show me where I stated I accepted lies without question? And again, if you would read slowly my answer to a previous poster (I think it was JTT), you will see that I agreed that rather than worry about the quantity of lies, the important factor is whether the lie is material. You and Candidone seem to be overlooking that I wrote this.

So I'll type this slowly in hopes that I will be clear. I don't care to count the number of lies of any politician, because once they have proven to be a liar, it doesn't really matter as far as their believability and trustworthiness goes. They are liars. Just because right now they are lying about a bunch of little things does not mean they won't lie about something big down the road. They have proven to be a liar and thus unworthy of my trust.

When choosing between liars, one does indeed have to consider the materiality of the lies.

If you return and read my response to JTT, you'll see I do believe each voter needs to determine how important any one particular lie is to them or even if they care if a politician lies or not. But as far as how often they lie or trying to keep score, it doesn't matter once you acknowledge that they all lie and do so repeatedly.

Yup; I was once a McCain supporter until he approved torture of our prisoners. I was even considering voting for him early in the campaign until I followed how each candidate performed on issues.

I've been a fence-sitter for the longest time, but between McCain and Obama, there's no longer a question about who's better fit to be president.

I've also said that I wished we had two different candidates.

It's still early enough to know that in politics things can change in seconds or minutes.

We still have about 40 days before election day, but my preference now is Obama.

If I said "none", then I mispoke. I'm sure there are Obama supporters who would jump ship, whether it would be to McCain or Barr or some other candidate if they believed Obama's lies/misstatements were greater than McCain's or became too many for them to stomach.

And I agree that abandoning Obama does not mean supporting McCain. Just as abandoning McCain, as I am considering, does not imply that I need to vote for Obama. I certainly did not expect BPB to jump on the McCain bandwagon. But at least he is honest enough to himself to admit he has problems with Obama and won't just vote for him because he is the democrat nominee.

Understandable. I figured it was probably more hyperbole than a legitimate assumption.

Do you ever grapple with the thought, however, and lies aside (if anyone can), if there is any merit in voting for someone who has about as much a chance of being President (no offense), as yourself?

Either McCain or Obama will become president.
Period.
....****, maybe Palin does too. McCain is getting up in the years.
Anyway, do you ever feel the need to plug the nose and vote for the "best" one because at least one of them has a shot?

You mean I've got no shot at being president? Dang, here I was hoping that the last two presidents are proof that a clown can get elected. Oh well.





That is truly the one question I will have to grapple with. When I was younger (not that I'm old now, mind you) I would have said that I would hold my nose and vote for the major party candidate that I could most stomach. But I've come to believe that doing that will never bring real change (apologies to Obama) to Washington. The trick is convincing enough other people that you don't have to accept that the choice is simply republican or democrat. While this will probably never happen (I'm a realist in this regard) I will sleep better knowing I voted my convictions rather than just simply toeing the party line.

The more I think about this little situation the more I believe the title of this thread was aptly chosen.

Heh! Quite so.

Have you seen this btw?

http://able2know.org/topic/123063-1#post-3414429

I'd recommend a look at the site every couple of days.

www.factcheck.org

One of the best things I ever learned from timber.

I am desperately waiting for a conservative on this site to show me that they really aren't all biased delusional idiots by admitting that this move makes their guy look way more like an erratic wackjob than a guy who is ready to be president.

Anyone? Come on, who among the right has the balls to admit the truth?

kicky, It's not that easy for Bush and the republicans. This bailout is contrary to their whole purpose for living. Bush already created the biggest government and handout - ooops, bailout in history - and that's of the world.