Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (84314)	12/13/2006 3:40:36 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 173976

Well, thanks. But, my point about the lies and Clinton is, I believe, important. First off, everyone lies. A recent study shows that people lie, on average, 20 times a day. Most are 'white lies': "Yes, you look fine", "It was delicious", "It's ok with me". The issue is not whether people lie, but what they lie about, and if you can deduce when they are lying. I believe that everyone has certain 'thresholds' for lying that they will and will not cross. Some people will lie about little things, and justify these lies as saving someone's feelings or just getting through the day. Some lie about bigger stuff, like cheating, and rationalize it in different ways. Whatever the rationalization, it is my opinion that once someone crosses one of those thresholds, it is much harder for them to not cross it again. Clinton is a womanizer. His lies have to do with this character weakness. I have no clue why he does so, nor what his internal rationalization is, but he's crossed that line. So, if he were to walk up to me today and say he's been faithful since Monica, I would believe he is lying. Bush has crossed a similar threshold - lying to fulfill what he misinterprets as his primary responsibility - to keep us safe. I believe he has crossed that line not only in direct issues dealing with his perception of national security, but, more importantly, I think he believes that he is the only one who CAN recognize this perceived threat, at least in contrast to his Democratic opponents. So, he justifies lying not only in direct security matters, but in issues that deal with his ability to keep his power - which he perceives as necessary for national security. In other words, Bush routinely lies about political stuff to retain power in order to keep us safe. The ease in which Bush admitted and shrugged off his lying about retaining Rumsfeld was a key indicator of his position. Most people, if caught in a lie that they believe would be viewed as unsightly, are at least a little sheepish about it. Bush was matter-of-fact, and seemed to have an attitude of "well, of course I lied - what of it?". To me, this and other incidents indicate that Bush is comfortable about lying to retain power, and has probably crossed that line many times. So, when I say 'Bush is a liar', I mean that I perceive he has crossed a major threshold that differentiates our everyday lying form those who using lying as a tool. The audacity of lying is extremely powerful - most people can't detect a good liar, mostly because they can't imagine someone lying so naturally. I believe Bush has turned into a very good, natural liar, and still probably sleeps like a baby - the deep sleep of a zealot.