Skip to main content

Lies? Who is going to take the liars on?

The last week has seen the contenders for the White House spruik their stuff at the respective Party conventions.   Trouble is, a lot of the rhetoric employed has involved telling plain ol' lies.    Who is gonna take up the challenge in calling out the liars?     The press?   'Fraid not!

"What if it turns out that when the press calls a lie a lie, nobody cares?"

That's the question asked by Atlantic editor-in-chief James Bennet (8/28/12) after a raft of Pinocchios and flaming pants failed to sway the Romney campaign from its position that "we're not going to let our campaign be dictated by factcheckers."

I think that's the wrong question, though. The real question is: Does the press have the courage to call a lie a lie–and stick by it?
 

It's hard to be hopeful about that when you have one of the media's most prominent factcheckers, the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler (9/1/12), explicitly downplaying the importance of honesty in politics. Under the headline "The Truth? C'mon, This Is a Political Convention," Kessler wrote:

For all the outrage (on the left) about misrepresentations and misinformation in Rep. Paul Ryan’s speech accepting the Republican nomination for vice president, my reaction was: par for the course.

We are, of course, talking about a political convention. The whole point is for the party to put its best foot forward to the American people. By its very nature, that means downplaying unpleasant facts, highlighting the positive and knocking down the opposing team.


Kessler maintained that until Ryan's speech, his "impression was that…the Republicans were generally on good behavior"–despite the fact that the first night was "devoted to the political exploitation of a single Obama gaffe–'You didn’t build that'–the Republicans blatantly misrepresent…with virtually every speaker making reference to it." That's an awfully low standard for good behavior!

Kessler excused the mendacity of Ryan's speech on the grounds that it wasn't as deceptive as the speech Sen. Zell Miller gave at the 2004 RNC–a speech that was lavishly praised at the time for its effectiveness. Kessler gave Romney credit for comparative honesty as well: "He repeated some claims that have earned him Four Pinocchios (such as Obama going on an 'apology tour' overseas) but he passed up many others."

Are you beginning to see why politicians are not particularly afraid of factcheckers?"

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...