Lies and the lying liars who tell them.

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20...svote2008campaigntruth

Truth gets rubbery on the US presidential trail: fact-checkers by Charlotte Raab
Thu Jan 3, 3:27 AM ET



With scam statistics, baseless criticisms, misquotes, and cockeyed memories, the truth gets a battering on the campaign trail in the hands of candidates for the White House.

But imprecision is a venerable US political tradition, according to FactCheck.org, an independent watchdog which aims to "hold politicians accountable" for what they say.

"Presidential candidates kept us busy" over the past year, said Brooks Jackson, director of FactCheck, an arm of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.

The campaign trail produced "a bumper-crop of falsehoods and distortions," which the organization has threshed through for its new list of prize-winning whoppers.

Topping the list with not one but five bogus claims was former New York mayor and Republican contender Rudy Giuliani.

FactCheck demolishes each of them, especially Giuliani's assertion that New York City was suffering "record crime" until he became mayor.

"In fact," says FactCheck's sober analysis, "the city recorded its highest rates of both violent crime and property crime years before he took office. The downward trend was well established before he was sworn in" as mayor, in 1994.

Giuliani's Republican rival, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, maybe topped the field for hyperbole, when he told voters in a television advertisement: "In the next 10 years, we'll see more progress, more change than the world has seen in the last 10 centuries."

The Democrats were no slouches in the hokum department. Senator Hillary Clinton claimed in a TV spot that soldiers in the National Guard and Reserves did not enjoy health insurance until she took up their cause.

But FactCheck researched the issue and demonstrated that most of them did have health care.

"Clinton did help expand and enhance government health care coverage for reservists, but can't claim credit for creating coverage where none existed," it said.

Clinton's main competitor, Senator Barack Obama, has been widely challenged for stating that there are more young black men in prison than in universities in the United States.

In this case, Obama could point to a 2002 study by the Justice Policy Institute for evidence. But more recent data from the US Census Bureau concludes the opposite is true.

Covering up for an exposed half-truth sometimes leads to more prevarication. Romney claimed recently that as a youth he "saw" his father, who was governor of Michigan, walking in a protest with civil rights leader Martin Luther King.

Challenged on it, Romney argued that "saw" didn't necessarily mean with his own eyes.

"I 'saw' him in the figurative sense," Romney explained.

"If you look at the literature or look at the dictionary, the term 'saw' includes being aware of -- in the sense I've described."


The 2008 presidential candidates are no better nor worse tellers of tall tales than their predecessors, Jackson said.

"It is just a function of running for office," he said.

"The incentive is to say things that get votes... Truth is of secondary importance to a candidate."

Famous exaggerations can long outlive elections, such as one from Al Gore, who lost the 2000 race for the White House to George W. Bush and is still remembered for boasting that he invented the Internet.

But some fabrications never seem to hurt politicians, according to Carl Cannon, the National Journal's White House correspondent, who has made a compilation of presidential tall tales after covering campaigns for more than 20 years.

In his time, president John F. Kennedy boasted he could read 1,200 words a minute. President Lyndon Johnson claimed that he had an ancestor who died at the Alamo -- a heroic battle in Johnson's home state of Texas. In fact, Johnson great uncle took part -- but didn't die -- in another battle with Mexico, at San Jacinto.

Cannon, writing in the Atlantic magazine, also recalled that Ronald Reagan boasted to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal that he had filmed the liberation of the Nazi death camps by US soldiers in World War II.

The problem with that story was, Reagan never served in Europe.



Challenged on it, Romney argued that "saw" didn't necessarily mean with his own eyes
I guess it depends on your definition of "is" comes to mind.

 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,509
575
126
You know, whats interesting, is I searched for Ron Paul and did not find one where he had to be corrected.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
1. Al Gore *did not* claim he invented the internet. This has long been debunked if the actual quote is analyzed in any fair sense - as common sense would suggest.

2. For some reason the article fails to mention that Romney said in 1978 specifically that he and his father walked the streets of Detroit with MLK, Jr. He now admit that was false.

BTW, I haven't seen any errors in Kucinich pointed out, either.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Because nobody cares about Ron Paul and Kucinch? ;)

In the car after lunch today with a couple 37 and 40 year old males, well educated, techies. There were Ron Paul stickers posted on almost every light pole, I pointed them out, they both said "who is Ron Paul"?

We are a media dominated society.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,602
13,980
146
Anyone surprised by this? When you consider that the government has to try to teach their employees "ethics,"something that should have been learned as they grew up. Politicians lie...every one of them. If their lips are moving, they're probably lying about something.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Romney and myself are also both life-long varmint hunters.

You should see what a 12 gauge does to a cockroach.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,509
575
126
Originally posted by: alchemize
Because nobody cares about Ron Paul and Kucinch? ;)

In the car after lunch today with a couple 37 and 40 year old males, well educated, techies. There were Ron Paul stickers posted on almost every light pole, I pointed them out, they both said "who is Ron Paul"?

We are a media dominated society.

Well, maybe they should care.

Listening to huckabee talk is like listening to bill clinton....and not in a good way.

when i listen to the radio and tv fools talk they mention, likeability as a big factor...how huckabee and romney are likeable.

Who cares about their values!

 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: alchemize
Because nobody cares about Ron Paul and Kucinch? ;)

And that is the problem with this country.

Those two are by far the most honest candidates we have.

If we need only one thing in a President, we need honesty. Instead, dumb Americans vote for criminals and liars.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: alchemize
Because nobody cares about Ron Paul and Kucinch? ;)

In the car after lunch today with a couple 37 and 40 year old males, well educated, techies. There were Ron Paul stickers posted on almost every light pole, I pointed them out, they both said "who is Ron Paul"?

We are a media dominated society.

Well, maybe they should care.

Listening to huckabee talk is like listening to bill clinton....and not in a good way.

when i listen to the radio and tv fools talk they mention, likeability as a big factor...how huckabee and romney are likeable.

Who cares about their values!

Maybe? Absolutely they should care! Problem is, people don't get elected based on what people should do :(

As far as likeability, I don't see how Romney is likeable. He looks "presidential", but he also seems like a guy that sold his soul and has no regrets about it.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: alchemize
Because nobody cares about Ron Paul and Kucinch? ;)

In the car after lunch today with a couple 37 and 40 year old males, well educated, techies. There were Ron Paul stickers posted on almost every light pole, I pointed them out, they both said "who is Ron Paul"?

We are a media dominated society.

Well, maybe they should care.

Listening to huckabee talk is like listening to bill clinton....and not in a good way.

when i listen to the radio and tv fools talk they mention, likeability as a big factor...how huckabee and romney are likeable.

Who cares about their values!

GoPackGo and I may have found common ground, to a point.

Why is it that people are so gullible about the presidential candidates? When they find a 'likable' used car salesman, they are still aware he's selling them a car.

But with a president, they fail to understand he can be a salesman too, just as phony, with an ulterior agenda.

'Grandpa' Reagan was backing (or covering for) illegal missile sales to Iran, terrorism in Nicaragua, death squads in other countries. But he sure was folksy!

If the American people could look at the president more as a salesman for interests, from big drug companies to military interests, and that their role is to come across as 'likable' and keep the public under control, it'd go a long way to helping the public understand the manipulations, and appreciate those candidates who are not pursuing such agendas as much, for example the courage of an Eisenhower speaking out on the military-industrial-congressional complex.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,602
13,980
146
Originally posted by: bamacre

If we need only one thing in a President, we need honesty. Instead, dumb Americans vote for criminals and liars.

While I have difficulty arguing that point, the most honest president we've had in a long time wasn't exactly the most efficient one. Jimmy Carter came into office in a very difficult time in America's history, battled high inflation, high energy costs, and the recession after the Vietnam war, and is often referred to by those on the right as the worst president in history...Maybe he wasn't the most effective president we've had, but he was possibly the most honest one we've had...especially when you compare him to those who have followed him...
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: bamacre

If we need only one thing in a President, we need honesty. Instead, dumb Americans vote for criminals and liars.

While I have difficulty arguing that point, the most honest president we've had in a long time wasn't exactly the most efficient one. Jimmy Carter came into office in a very difficult time in America's history, battled high inflation, high energy costs, and the recession after the Vietnam war, and is often referred to by those on the right as the worst president in history...Maybe he wasn't the most effective president we've had, but he was possibly the most honest one we've had...especially when you compare him to those who have followed him...

He definitely had his problems, but was far better than any of the republicans who followed - who may have 'seemed' better to the public at times, but had terrible policies, e.g., debt.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,509
575
126
what I really want is a government that will act in the best interests of the citizens of the country.

We have a weak dollar
Expensive Gas
Food prices rising fast
Property taxes rising fast

Between most dems and pubs they both pander but dont perform. They have their corporate masters to report to.

The last 10 years of the housing market was a shell game.

Large american banks are in trouble.

A vote for Clinton is a vote for Bush.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
You know, whats interesting, is I searched for Ron Paul and did not find one where he had to be corrected.

Factcheck only has so many resources, and is facing one of the largest stable of candidates ever assembled. They have to allocate based on some metric, and it appears that they address the remarks made by the candidates who are leading in the polls and who appear to have the greatest chance of getting elected. Given that they want people to make informed decisions about the people they are likely to vote for, they don't prioritize remarks from those in the back of the pack.

In fact, if Factcheck were to respond to your statement they would point out how you are twisting their lack of coverage of Paul into evidence of Paul's penchant for only stating absolute truth. I think they'd be offended.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,509
575
126
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
You know, whats interesting, is I searched for Ron Paul and did not find one where he had to be corrected.

Factcheck only has so many resources, and is facing one of the largest stable of candidates ever assembled. They have to allocate based on some metric, and it appears that they address the remarks made by the candidates who are leading in the polls and who appear to have the greatest chance of getting elected. Given that they want people to make informed decisions about the people they are likely to vote for, they don't prioritize remarks from those in the back of the pack.

In fact, if Factcheck were to respond to your statement they would point out how you are twisting their lack of coverage of Paul into evidence of Paul's penchant for only stating absolute truth. I think they'd be offended.

I stated a fact.

Did I lie? Did I state that factcheck endorsed him? no.

:cookie:
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
You know, whats interesting, is I searched for Ron Paul and did not find one where he had to be corrected.

Factcheck only has so many resources, and is facing one of the largest stable of candidates ever assembled. They have to allocate based on some metric, and it appears that they address the remarks made by the candidates who are leading in the polls and who appear to have the greatest chance of getting elected. Given that they want people to make informed decisions about the people they are likely to vote for, they don't prioritize remarks from those in the back of the pack.

In fact, if Factcheck were to respond to your statement they would point out how you are twisting their lack of coverage of Paul into evidence of Paul's penchant for only stating absolute truth. I think they'd be offended.

I stated a fact.

Did I lie? Did I state that factcheck endorsed him? no.

:cookie:

Factcheck often addresses candidate statements that make misleading implications.
Your statement: Factcheck never corrected Paul. Your implication: RP never says anything worth correcting. Your implication is misleading, for reasons I stated above.

Keep your cookie, it was a secretary's birthday and we had a cake break.

Here's some RP fact checks: http://blog.washingtonpost.com...r/candidates/ron_paul/
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,509
575
126
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
You know, whats interesting, is I searched for Ron Paul and did not find one where he had to be corrected.

Factcheck only has so many resources, and is facing one of the largest stable of candidates ever assembled. They have to allocate based on some metric, and it appears that they address the remarks made by the candidates who are leading in the polls and who appear to have the greatest chance of getting elected. Given that they want people to make informed decisions about the people they are likely to vote for, they don't prioritize remarks from those in the back of the pack.

In fact, if Factcheck were to respond to your statement they would point out how you are twisting their lack of coverage of Paul into evidence of Paul's penchant for only stating absolute truth. I think they'd be offended.

I stated a fact.

Did I lie? Did I state that factcheck endorsed him? no.

:cookie:

Factcheck often addresses candidate statements that make misleading implications.
Your statement: Factcheck never corrected Paul. Your implication: RP never says anything worth correcting. Your implication is misleading, for reasons I stated above.

Keep your cookie, it was a secretary's birthday and we had a cake break.

Here's some RP fact checks: http://blog.washingtonpost.com...r/candidates/ron_paul/

I think you need two

:cookie: :cookie:
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The fact basically is, in the history of the world, there has never been a libertarian government. So in a sense, Ron Paul is theorizing about pie in the sky.

And we have what amounts to a massive infrastructure government has built, and none of it would be there in a true libertarian government.

We might have a few miles of dirt road turn pikes that no one would use because the private companies who built them charge too much.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The fact basically is, in the history of the world, there has never been a libertarian government. So in a sense, Ron Paul is theorizing about pie in the sky.

And we have what amounts to a massive infrastructure government has built, and none of it would be there in a true libertarian government.

We might have a few miles of dirt road turn pikes that no one would use because the private companies who built them charge too much.


He wouldn't have so much support if we didn't have so many problems. And the problems are coming from both parties. Where else are people to turn?
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
Originally posted by: techs
In his time, president John F. Kennedy boasted he could read 1,200 words a minute. President Lyndon Johnson claimed that he had an ancestor who died at the Alamo -- a heroic battle in Johnson's home state of Texas. In fact, Johnson great uncle took part -- but didn't die -- in another battle with Mexico, at San Jacinto.
I'm confused by these statements about Kennedy and Johnson. Reading 1200 words a minute is pretty fast, but not impossible. I knew an L.A. Times book critic who read 1400 words a minute.

And Johnson's statement is demonstrably true: Suppose Johnson said, "I have an ancestor who died at the Alamo." You can parse that sentence at least three ways:

I have an ancestor who was at the Battle of the Alamo when he died
Translation: The ancestor died at the Battle of the Alamo.

I have an ancestor who died who was at the Battle of the Alamo.
Translation: My ancestor, who was at the Battle of the Alamo would be the oldest living human if he hadn't died at some point in the 171 years since the battle occurred (in 1836).

I have an ancestor who had a fatal heart attack when he visited The Alamo in 1925.
Translation: Even today, people occasionally die at historic sites.
 

Comanche

Member
May 8, 2005
148
0
0
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Anyone surprised by this? When you consider that the government has to try to teach their employees "ethics,"something that should have been learned as they grew up. Politicians lie...every one of them. If their lips are moving, they're probably lying about something.

You forgot to add "and watch your pocket books". Will Rogers or Mark Twain said that.
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
So now that we have established that the people running this country are cronic liers.

I have to ask. Who ya going to vote for? Its hard to ask that question . Since non are really qualified to run a GOOD nation. Where have all the good men gone?

My lord Jesus Christ once said this .

Its harder for a camel to crawl threw the eye of the needle than it is for a rich man to enter the gates of heaven. No wonder they are tring to kill GOD.

This was true 2,000 years ago. How much worse has man become since than . In the spiritual sense.

IF I went out on election day it wouldn't be to vote.

America needs to vote off the ticket. Write in vote is better than voting for the winner no matter if Rep. or Dem. They both smell stinky. Both are corrupt and have hidden agenda's.

I pray their is a God . I truelly want to see true justic done. A few people like myself against the rest of the world. Right will win the day . But billions will pay. I know you might think its wrong for me to want . This system to end. I know I am a small minority.
But on that great and wonderful day I will rejoice in the death of Billions.
 

spittledip

Diamond Member
Apr 23, 2005
4,480
1
81
Originally posted by: Craig234
2. For some reason the article fails to mention that Romney said in 1978 specifically that he and his father walked the streets of Detroit with MLK, Jr. He now admit that was false.

LOL!!!!

He actually said that?

too phunny
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: spittledip
Originally posted by: Craig234
2. For some reason the article fails to mention that Romney said in 1978 specifically that he and his father walked the streets of Detroit with MLK, Jr. He now admit that was false.

LOL!!!!

He actually said that?

too phunny

Yes.
 

spittledip

Diamond Member
Apr 23, 2005
4,480
1
81
OK, I see what he means, but he obviously said it in a way to make it seem better than what it actually was. It wasn't a lie, but it was :p