Comments on: All lies are not created equal *UPDATED* & *UPDATED AGAIN* http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/ Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:19:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Why Obama’s Associations are So Important | Somewhere On AlA… http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-117579 Why Obama’s Associations are So Important | Somewhere On AlA… Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:31:43 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-117579 [...] of change are the politics of changing your words to fit your audience, and when caught, to incrementally admit a mistake all while trying to nuance his explanation. In other words, he is either unprincipled to the [...] [...] of change are the politics of changing your words to fit your audience, and when caught, to incrementally admit a mistake all while trying to nuance his explanation. In other words, he is either unprincipled to the [...]

]]> By: Bookworm Room » Those wacky, extreme, ill-informed, violent, dishonest Democrat politicians http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-107551 Bookworm Room » Those wacky, extreme, ill-informed, violent, dishonest Democrat politicians Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:11:29 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-107551 [...] Barack Obama (President):  Explicitly denies the depth and intensity of his relationship with ACORN; lied repeatedly about his past plans for American health care and about the effect ObamaCare would have on Americans; he lied about the stimulus (lied, not just puffed, which is arguably forgivable advertising); he lied about using federal financing to fund his campaign; he lied blatantly about his before-and-after statements re negotiating with terrorists; and he’s lied about picayune things such as audience responses to his speeches.  I’ve written two long-ish essays about the nature of Obama’s lies.  If you’re interested, they’re here and here. [...] [...] Barack Obama (President):  Explicitly denies the depth and intensity of his relationship with ACORN; lied repeatedly about his past plans for American health care and about the effect ObamaCare would have on Americans; he lied about the stimulus (lied, not just puffed, which is arguably forgivable advertising); he lied about using federal financing to fund his campaign; he lied blatantly about his before-and-after statements re negotiating with terrorists; and he’s lied about picayune things such as audience responses to his speeches.  I’ve written two long-ish essays about the nature of Obama’s lies.  If you’re interested, they’re here and here. [...]

]]> By: Rational, Sane, Non-Super-Liberal-Leftist-Socialist People Oppose Obama Because They Are Racists « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-26832 Rational, Sane, Non-Super-Liberal-Leftist-Socialist People Oppose Obama Because They Are Racists « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT Mon, 04 Aug 2008 03:30:27 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-26832 [...] won’t be because Obama’s a compulsive liar who clearly thinks we in the public are too stupid to catch up with his lies, it will be because I’m a [...] [...] won’t be because Obama’s a compulsive liar who clearly thinks we in the public are too stupid to catch up with his lies, it will be because I’m a [...]

]]> By: echeccone http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23319 echeccone Mon, 12 May 2008 19:26:16 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23319 Bookworm, your definition is a good start, although I would judge someone by their actions and words much more heavily than their associations. But I understand that some people believe that Wright is Obama's spiritual advisor and want to make hay of that as a ding to his judgment. I don't agree with it, but I can accept it. In any case, by that definition, you ought to be calling out McCain for his past denials and shifting explanations for similar associations and acts of malfeasance. For example, McCain was one of the "Keating Five," and although never convicted of wrongdoing, did intervene on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating's airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal." Although he was let off on a technicality, no one doubts the extent of fraud and racketeering perpetrated by Keating, and yet McCain maintained the relationship. Bad judgment? Different than Obama's link to Wright? How so? And speaking of unfortunate associations, in 1995, McCain sent birthday regards, and regrets for not attending, to Joseph "Joe Bananas" Bonano, the head of the New York Bonano crime family, who had retired to Arizona. Old Joe is responsible for more deaths and "terrorist acts" than the Weatherman Group, so why isn't Fox reporting on this 24/7 like it is on the Ayers-Obama connection? What's the difference? Finally, McCain also admitted that adultery caused the breakup of his first marriage--a comment that was widely interpreted to mean more than just his affair with his current wife Cindy--and appeared less than credible on the allegations of another affair with a D.C. lobbyist. There are on-the-record sources quoted in the NYT saying that they were instructed to keep Iseman away from McCain, and McCain contradicted himself on at least one occasion on certain legislative favors made to facilitate a media acquisition by one of Iseman's clients. When the news of a potential affair broke, his campaign manager kept many reporters away from the candidate until the story could be delivered consistently, which was an odd response given McCain's normally open style with the media. Interestingly, McCain also initially didn't deny the affair but attacked the NYT for a smear campaign; moreover, his story on what exactly he did legislatively for Iseman (the bigger sin, from my standpoint) shifted in the very pattern which you abhor. I'm wondering which of these examples of unsavory association or worse you'd like to distinguish. I'm sure there are others, too. He is a politician afterall. Personally, I don't care much about any of these so-called issues, since they distract from the important policy differences. My concerns with McCain have to do with his position on Iraq, which is untenable and wrong-headed, and his comments on selecting federal judges similar to Bush's nominations, which, if sincere, will make the Supreme Court far more conservative than the nation's center. Beyond that, I actually like McCain quite a lot. His views on climate change (believes it needs to be addressed), immigration (for realistic policies, including amnesty, until he flip-flopped) and free trade (sees it as a source of growth and wealth) are similar to mine. And I loved his willingness to attack the ethanol subsidies/tariffs even in the state of Iowa amongst farmers. He remains more of a maverick than conservative Republicans hope, and this could prove his greatest asset and the Dem's greatest fear during the fall campaign. I just wish we could talk about those issues rather than whether his lies are less compulsive than Obama's. It really is an unproductive discussion. Bookworm, your definition is a good start, although I would judge someone by their actions and words much more heavily than their associations. But I understand that some people believe that Wright is Obama’s spiritual advisor and want to make hay of that as a ding to his judgment. I don’t agree with it, but I can accept it. In any case, by that definition, you ought to be calling out McCain for his past denials and shifting explanations for similar associations and acts of malfeasance. For example, McCain was one of the “Keating Five,” and although never convicted of wrongdoing, did intervene on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating’s airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating’s luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain’s wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a “sweetheart deal.” Although he was let off on a technicality, no one doubts the extent of fraud and racketeering perpetrated by Keating, and yet McCain maintained the relationship. Bad judgment? Different than Obama’s link to Wright? How so? And speaking of unfortunate associations, in 1995, McCain sent birthday regards, and regrets for not attending, to Joseph “Joe Bananas” Bonano, the head of the New York Bonano crime family, who had retired to Arizona. Old Joe is responsible for more deaths and “terrorist acts” than the Weatherman Group, so why isn’t Fox reporting on this 24/7 like it is on the Ayers-Obama connection? What’s the difference? Finally, McCain also admitted that adultery caused the breakup of his first marriage–a comment that was widely interpreted to mean more than just his affair with his current wife Cindy–and appeared less than credible on the allegations of another affair with a D.C. lobbyist. There are on-the-record sources quoted in the NYT saying that they were instructed to keep Iseman away from McCain, and McCain contradicted himself on at least one occasion on certain legislative favors made to facilitate a media acquisition by one of Iseman’s clients. When the news of a potential affair broke, his campaign manager kept many reporters away from the candidate until the story could be delivered consistently, which was an odd response given McCain’s normally open style with the media. Interestingly, McCain also initially didn’t deny the affair but attacked the NYT for a smear campaign; moreover, his story on what exactly he did legislatively for Iseman (the bigger sin, from my standpoint) shifted in the very pattern which you abhor. I’m wondering which of these examples of unsavory association or worse you’d like to distinguish. I’m sure there are others, too. He is a politician afterall. Personally, I don’t care much about any of these so-called issues, since they distract from the important policy differences. My concerns with McCain have to do with his position on Iraq, which is untenable and wrong-headed, and his comments on selecting federal judges similar to Bush’s nominations, which, if sincere, will make the Supreme Court far more conservative than the nation’s center. Beyond that, I actually like McCain quite a lot. His views on climate change (believes it needs to be addressed), immigration (for realistic policies, including amnesty, until he flip-flopped) and free trade (sees it as a source of growth and wealth) are similar to mine. And I loved his willingness to attack the ethanol subsidies/tariffs even in the state of Iowa amongst farmers. He remains more of a maverick than conservative Republicans hope, and this could prove his greatest asset and the Dem’s greatest fear during the fall campaign. I just wish we could talk about those issues rather than whether his lies are less compulsive than Obama’s. It really is an unproductive discussion.

]]> By: Ymarsakar http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23274 Ymarsakar Sat, 10 May 2008 07:19:56 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23274 I'm not sure whatever things Obama might have said in public equals the lies he has told himself when the cameras weren't on. I’m not sure whatever things Obama might have said in public equals the lies he has told himself when the cameras weren’t on.

]]> By: Tap http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23249 Tap Fri, 09 May 2008 20:13:14 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23249 There is certainly too much variety in the types of lies told for me to attempt to categorize each possible type and give each type a relative weight. What Book has described here, though, is obviously true - there are different types of lies and they definitely don't all carry the same level of offensiveness. Why don't we stick to comparing one type of lie amongst the various politicians? The type that Book was talking about in her post: Knowingly making a false statement in order to hide undeniably unacceptable behavior/deeds/words? There is certainly too much variety in the types of lies told for me to attempt to categorize each possible type and give each type a relative weight.

What Book has described here, though, is obviously true – there are different types of lies and they definitely don’t all carry the same level of offensiveness.

Why don’t we stick to comparing one type of lie amongst the various politicians? The type that Book was talking about in her post: Knowingly making a false statement in order to hide undeniably unacceptable behavior/deeds/words?

]]> By: Bookworm http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23247 Bookworm Fri, 09 May 2008 20:07:28 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23247 echeccone (Comment 4): I don't have time for a long comment now, but I don't recall ever saying that only Democratic candidates are guilty of lies that they use to cover malfeasance. I did point to the fact that the two Democratic candidates in this year's race frequently use lies to hide the fact that they've engaged in illegal, unethical or distasteful (to the voters) acts, or to hide the fact that their past associations are less than savory. You extrapolated beyond what I said (which is fine if you really think Dem candidates traditionally are the ones most likely to tell self-exculpatory lies). Also, I think you might want to read what I wrote because I did define pretty closely what voters consider (or should consider) unforgivable likes, a definition I've reiterated in this comment. echeccone (Comment 4):

I don’t have time for a long comment now, but I don’t recall ever saying that only Democratic candidates are guilty of lies that they use to cover malfeasance. I did point to the fact that the two Democratic candidates in this year’s race frequently use lies to hide the fact that they’ve engaged in illegal, unethical or distasteful (to the voters) acts, or to hide the fact that their past associations are less than savory. You extrapolated beyond what I said (which is fine if you really think Dem candidates traditionally are the ones most likely to tell self-exculpatory lies). Also, I think you might want to read what I wrote because I did define pretty closely what voters consider (or should consider) unforgivable likes, a definition I’ve reiterated in this comment.

]]> By: Alex http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23239 Alex Fri, 09 May 2008 17:34:34 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23239 I think many ambitious people who aspire to leadership, do so because they either fail to acquire much self knowledge, or tend to suppress any propensity to "see ourselves as others see us". How many men and women, if they were completely honest with themselves, would claim that they had the qualities of intellect and character necessary to guide others? Politicians do this all the time - justified by self-serving talk (lies) about their concern for the public good. I think many ambitious people who aspire to leadership, do so because they either fail to acquire much self knowledge, or tend to suppress any propensity to “see ourselves as others see us”.

How many men and women, if they were completely honest with themselves, would claim that they had the qualities of intellect and character necessary to guide others? Politicians do this all the time – justified by self-serving talk (lies) about their concern for the public good.

]]> By: echeccone http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23229 echeccone Fri, 09 May 2008 13:15:09 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23229 I agree with Alex's post above. I would encourage Bookworm to offer a strict definition of the meaning of unacceptable lies and how only the democratic candidates currently and historically have made them. Even better would be to set those definitions and then judge only future comments (and all of them) based upon it. If you could show a statistically significant difference between the frequency of occurrence amongst liberal candidates rather than conservative ones, then you would have proven me, Alex and T.S. Eliot wrong. Short of that, I think you're simply showing cognitive bias (i.e., a conservative only sees liberal lies, a liberal only sees conservative lies, a hammer only sees nails...). I wonder why self-deception is essential to govern others, Alex. I mean, much governing is now conducted by markets, which do not require self-deception. And scientific progress is predicated on factual analysis and objective verification by an unbiased second party. Wouldn't it be great if our policies (taxes, budget, foreign policy, etc.) were set that way? I bet we'd be more peaceful and prosperous. Or am I being idealistic now? I agree with Alex’s post above. I would encourage Bookworm to offer a strict definition of the meaning of unacceptable lies and how only the democratic candidates currently and historically have made them. Even better would be to set those definitions and then judge only future comments (and all of them) based upon it. If you could show a statistically significant difference between the frequency of occurrence amongst liberal candidates rather than conservative ones, then you would have proven me, Alex and T.S. Eliot wrong. Short of that, I think you’re simply showing cognitive bias (i.e., a conservative only sees liberal lies, a liberal only sees conservative lies, a hammer only sees nails…).

I wonder why self-deception is essential to govern others, Alex. I mean, much governing is now conducted by markets, which do not require self-deception. And scientific progress is predicated on factual analysis and objective verification by an unbiased second party. Wouldn’t it be great if our policies (taxes, budget, foreign policy, etc.) were set that way? I bet we’d be more peaceful and prosperous. Or am I being idealistic now?

]]> By: Alex http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/05/08/all-lies-are-not-created-equal/comment-page-1/#comment-23228 Alex Fri, 09 May 2008 12:57:20 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=2869#comment-23228 T S Eliot observed that the pursuit of politics is incompatible with a strict attention to exact meanings on all occasions. Professional politicians are motivated to lie - even to themselves. They have acquired the habit of self-deception which is essential in order to govern others. T S Eliot observed that the pursuit of politics is incompatible with a strict attention to exact meanings on all occasions.

Professional politicians are motivated to lie – even to themselves. They have acquired the habit of self-deception which is essential in order to govern others.

]]>