Political Lies (1 Viewer)

[MT15]

Maybe we should keep track of particularly egregious lies about policy and government. I know I see Daniel Dale still doing good work fact checking what politicians say.

Note: I don’t see this as a thread for nit-picking. So and so said there were 13 violations and there were only 11, for example. Rather the lies that completely misrepresent some policy, or law.

I‘ll start with this one I just saw:

 

[Xeno]

Does the server even have the space to hold a topic this potentially massive?

 

[Taurus]

Eh, petabytes are cheap

 

[Nebaghead]

Eh, petabytes are cheap

Just bought my first petabyte SAN for work. Using it for our test and staging environment.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

you mean majority of the time when a politician opens his mouth?

 

[MT15]

Okay, points taken. LOL

So, here is an example of something I don’t consider to be an egregious lie, even though it turned out to not be true. Obama promised those using the ACA could keep their own doctors. I believe he meant for that to be the way the ACA worked, and he believed it to be true when he said it. I think (IIRC) changes made by Congress and the states made it end up not true. So I wouldn‘t count that as an egregious lie.

Now, all of the claims of enough voter fraud that it would have changed the outcome during the 2020 presidential election are egregious lies, but we have been basically covering that in another thread(s).

I saw this by Tom Cotton today, and it just struck me that it was a complete misrepresentation of the facts and there may be others from either party that possibly don’t deserve their own thread, but could be discussed in passing. Just to sort of keep track of the truth.

It won’t hurt my feelings in the slightest though, if you all don’t like the topic.

 

[Xeno]

I've got no problem with the topic it just seems impossible to keep up lol. Plus I can already see the Trumpster posts doing exactly what you said not to do in the OP.

 

[Optimus Prime]

One I would like to see and never will, due to freedom of speech

If you are a politician or a spokesperson employed by a politician then you are perpetually under oath and cannot tell baldface lies to the american people

Be able to prove what you're saying

Saying that 'half the people support xxxxx' when the poll your referring to the number is actually 48.2% doesn't count, like MT15 says you can let that slide as a 'close enough' situation

There has to be a way to stop the non stop pants on fire lying

I don't know what a penalty should or could be if the lies pile up, a fine? a suspension? resignation?

But there needs to be some check and balances

 

[MT15]

This counts

 

[bird]

This counts

The problem there is that Hannity lacks the ability to engage in higher reasoning.

 

[Roofgardener]

I'm not sure whether this is the sort of thing you are after, as most of the 'lies' are from before Biden was actually president, and his team have dismissed some of them as being simple mis-speaks or stumbles. It makes for interesting reading though.

Fact-checks | PolitiFact

PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others on its Truth-O-Meter.

www.politifact.com

 

[samiam5211]

One I would like to see and never will, due to freedom of speech

If you are a politician or a spokesperson employed by a politician then you are perpetually under oath and cannot tell baldface lies to the american people

Be able to prove what you're saying

Saying that 'half the people support xxxxx' when the poll your referring to the number is actually 48.2% doesn't count, like MT15 says you can let that slide as a 'close enough' situation

There has to be a way to stop the non stop pants on fire lying

I don't know what a penalty should or could be if the lies pile up, a fine? a suspension? resignation?

But there needs to be some check and balances

The problem would be who adjudicates it.

If someone says, "people are sayin... INSERT LIE", would that person have to prove that he heard someone actually say the thing?

I wish there was some way to make this idea enforceable, but I don't see any way to remove politics from the application.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I'm not sure whether this is the sort of thing you are after, as most of the 'lies' are from before Biden was actually president, and his team have dismissed some of them as being simple mis-speaks or stumbles. It makes for interesting reading though.

Fact-checks | PolitiFact

PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others on its Truth-O-Meter.

www.politifact.com

Biden has a long history of this. Some of it is misspeaking, but some are also flat-out lies and he's been caught in them over the years.

I'm not sure we have a politician that doesn't do that. I think that's why people don't react too much to Biden's lies, they fall in the range of what we have come to expect from our politicians. It's sad that we have come to accept a certain amount of lying to the point that we just shrug it off (unless it's nonstop and pathological like the last 4 years).

 

[SystemShock]

The problem there is that Hannity lacks the ability to engage in higher reasoning.

I don't think that's it. I think it is him feeding biases and fears for profit.

 

[bird]

I don't think that's it. I think it is him feeding biases and fears for profit.

True. Which still doesn’t mean he has the ability to engage in higher reasoning.

 

[Xeno]

I'm not sure whether this is the sort of thing you are after, as most of the 'lies' are from before Biden was actually president, and his team have dismissed some of them as being simple mis-speaks or stumbles. It makes for interesting reading though.

Fact-checks | PolitiFact

PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others on its Truth-O-Meter.

www.politifact.com

The vast majority fall under

Note: I don’t see this as a thread for nit-picking. So and so said there were 13 violations and there were only 11, for example. Rather the lies that completely misrepresent some policy, or law.

Almost all of them were nitpicking a quoted figure, several of them weren't even political statements and a couple more were outright opinions that can't be deemed true or false.

If you weren't sure this was "what [we're] after" then you didn't read the OP or you're being disingenuous.

Biden has a long history of this. Some of it is misspeaking, but some are also flat-out lies and he's been caught in them over the years.

I'm not sure we have a politician that doesn't do that. I think that's why people don't react too much to Biden's lies, they fall in the range of what we have come to expect from our politicians. It's sad that we have come to accept a certain amount of lying to the point that we just shrug it off (unless it's nonstop and pathological like the last 4 years).

We accept a certain amount of lying from politicians because we accept a certain amount of lying from people in general. People lie all the time. It's one of the first things children learn to do. The difference between that and what Trump did the last four years (and his entire life) is that he wouldn't even tell then truth when it was in his best interest to do so. He was a textbook pathological liar.

 

[Xeno]

I've got no problem with the topic it just seems impossible to keep up lol. Plus I can already see the Trumpster posts doing exactly what you said not to do in the OP.

Also, somebody better answer that phone 'cause I forkin' called it.

 

[SaintForLife]

This counts

Considering how often you complain about other people's sources it might be time to clean up your Twitter feed.

But Carusone has his own track record of inflammatory statements. Carusone’s now-defunct blog included degrading references to “trannies,” “jewry” and Bangladeshis.

For example, here’s a summary of a particularly insulting post called “Tranny Paradise”:

Carusone posted a lengthy diatribe in November 2005 about a Bangladeshi man who was robbed by “a gang of transvestites,” as Carusone described it. Carusone was offended that the gang was described as “attractive” in an article.
“Did you notice the word attractive? What the f**k is that doing in there? Is the write[r] a tranny lover too? Or, perhaps he’s trying to justify how these trannies tricked this Bangladeshi in the first place? Look man, we don’t need to know whether or not they were attractive. The f**king guy was Bangladeshi,” Carusone wrote. “And while we’re out, what the hell was he doing with $7,300 worth of stuff. The guy’s Banladeshi! [sic]”

The Astonishing Hypocrisy of Media Matters | National Review

The bottom line is that for most of the online world, revelations of past offensive comments aren’t causes of true anguish but rather instruments of revenge.

www-nationalreview-com.cdn.ampproject.org