Originally posted by: brencat
Originally posted by: Tab
If it's your job to lie is it moral?
Who the fvck cares? If you have a problem with it or can't look at yourself in the mirror when you come home at night, find another line of work. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Sorry if I'm a little blunt Tab, but I work on Wall St. and I've long ago shed that sensitive side of me.
You have sure delineated some lines between us. Who cares about the truth?
Even the lame argument that is has some connection to the biblical rendering to Caeser what is Caesar's falls flat - that was money, the ten commandments say not to lie.
If you have long since shed that 'sensitive side' then you have long since shed some important principles.
The Wall Street culture can be bad for that, and apparently is has been for you?
For example - Wall Street stands to make hundreds of billions, at least, if Social Security is somehow 'privatized' under a Republican plan.
*If* you knew Wall Street was backing that for its own profit and knew it would hurt the average citizen, would you see that as a good idea, something just fine to do?
I think there are limits for the press secretary's advocacy for the president, and they include not lying to the American people for political reasons.
For example, take the Monica scandal - if Clinton's press secretary had said she personally knew he had not had sex, that she had been with him at the time it was claimed (lying), that Monica had told her she was lying about the sex (lying), or some other fabrication that helped Clinton with a lie, is that ok? No. The secretary's job is to represent the administration's viewpoint, but within some limits, like not lying for politics.
We don't want the non-liars resigning, we want them there, not lying.
Note, not even McClellan admits lying or defends the idea of the press secretary lying - I'm having to argue the issue with the posters here who say it's fine.
I shouldn't even wast much time on the posters who don't understand why McClellan was repeating lies he was given before, and telling the truth now. The people who question that lack common sense, and understanding of the idea of 'statement against interest'. If OJ says tomorrow he did not kill Nicole, low credibility. If he said he did, high credibility. If Bill Clinton said he did not have sex with that woman, maybe. If he said he did, high credibility.
The 'trying to sell books' attack is one of the oldest and most fallacious for any claims you don't like. It's far from any proof of anything. A lot of accurate books are written for money.