Presidential and VP Candidates Lying?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Do you think that Kerry, Bush, Cheney, and Edwards are really lying? I mean, they have to realize that the media, and relatively intelligent Americans are able to check out the facts for themselves. Honestly, I think they are either making errors in their figures and/or stretching the truth. When one of these individuals are making a speech, they should have the facts straight, however, in a debate don't you think it may be difficult to remember all the statistics accurately? Isn't reasonable that they could make a few errors? Also, haven't you stretched the truth a little in a job interview? Face it all four of them either lied, made errors and/or stretch the truth. Should we be so hard on them as most of us probably have done the same thing? Or do you think they are out and out lying?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,682 • Replies: 21

No top replies

American poet John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) based the following poem on a fable which was told in India many years ago.

Quote:

0 Replies

It is more distortions, IMO, than outright lying. Like the percentage of U.S. casualties...different populations used in the calculation yield different results.

And like the distortion re: Cheney saying that Saddam and AlQueda collaberated in the 911 attack when he really said there was a relationship between the two, not necessariy related to 911.

Just to cite a couple.

0 Replies

Excellent post, Phoenix.

In some cases, though, especially with political candidates, things are distorted on purpose in order to induce a certain response -- either from the candidate or the public.

0 Replies

Linkat - I pointed this out in another thread, but your post reminded me that there's another factorto be considered here, namely, not being informed.

Edwards told the American people in the debate that rich millionaires sitting by their swimming pools pay less in taxes than the men fighting on the ground in Iraq. He obviously believes what he said and wants the public to believe it as well.

The facts don't support his claim since those serving in combat zones get a combat tax exclusion on their wages. Can he really be that misinformed or was he purposely throwing that sentence out because it would resonate with undecided voters?

I've not yet been able to stretch the truth in a job interview. I'm too aware that prospective employers generally check facts and I'd be too embarrassed to be found fibbing. Just not worth it IMHO.

0 Replies

JW, you're being very selective.

0 Replies

Sure he was being selective Free, but it was just one example. I think nearly all of us would agree that each candidate is guilty of the same thing. I am sure you can come up with examples of the same thing done by Bush and company.

The point is, words and numbers can be manipulated to prove just about any point of view. And that is what most politicians do. After all, if you have an opposing view on a subject than your opponent and you have only one set of numbers, ya gotta paint them in a light that makes your side look right.

Phoenix, excellent reference to demonstrate this point. Couldn't have done better myself.

0 Replies

I hope they're lying. If they're telling the truth we're kaput.

I found particularly interesting Mr. Edwards promise "we'll make the same level of health care currently available to Senators and Congressmen available to all Americans". I got news for you. There isn't enough money or doctors available on God's Green Earth to do that.

I'm reminded of a quote from Alexander Tyler written in 1778:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship".

I am very much afraid that within most of our lifetimes we'll see this come to pass.

0 Replies

CoastalRat wrote:

Sure he was being selective Free, but it was just one example. I think nearly all of us would agree that each candidate is guilty of the same thing. I am sure you can come up with examples of the same thing done by Bush and company.

The point is, words and numbers can be manipulated to prove just about any point of view. And that is what most politicians do. After all, if you have an opposing view on a subject than your opponent and you have only one set of numbers, ya gotta paint them in a light that makes your side look right.

Phoenix, excellent reference to demonstrate this point. Couldn't have done better myself.

Exactly my point. We could easily turn this into a 'your candidates lie more than my candidates' argument. But the point really is about dishonesty in politics. Hence my comment.

0 Replies

duplicate deleted

0 Replies

I agree FreeDuck, I think they stretch the truth or distort in their favor - similar to how most people handle job interviews.

JustWonders - I consider stretching the truth in a job interview being on items that cannot be proven or are a little more subjective. For example, if the job requires you to be well organized and you say one of your major strengths is organization. When you are only average at organization. Not something like you received this or that award, but never did.

Jim - do you think Edwards was out and out lying or just naïve? Or perhaps wishful thinking?

0 Replies

Linkat - I suspect politicos of all stripes play to the audience - and then worry about if their promises are even possible only after the votes have been counted.