The Glade 4.0

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=c ... +paul+lies

He's a liar.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Hey your senseofhumor service is locked up again. You might want to give a go at restarting it.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

And your jaded. Not all of them.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Yeah. Dr. Gregory House and Dr. Cal Lightman can't both be wrong.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Not at the national level, no. I honestly don't believe that the bulk of the electorate is interested enough, educated enough or focused enough on the election process to make that possible. I'll even include myself in that analysis. I personally find it amazingly difficult and frustrating to try and find solid information on a candidate. It basically takes more effort than I believe is worth the trouble. This is especially true on the national stage because the pool of candidates that is available are all "tainted" at some level. I completely agree with Khross' statement that it's demoralizing that we don't hold those officials more accountable.

Aizle:

I live in a part of the country where councilmen are recalled for their off-duty behavior; so, amusingly, my answer is yes. We still public officials down here who recuse themselves from their positions when they know they've failed their constituents or not honored their agreements. I suppose that's one of the good things no one ever hears.

The fact that the Federal Government is so corrupt people expect fraud of Federal Officials is both sad and dangerous. Tree. Blood. Tyrants. Patriots.

_________________

Let's test that. Name a national level candidate that got elected that you believe has not lied to get elected. House, Senate or President within say the last 20 years.

Define "lie" first.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Name one honest politician.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

I think you're mixing in local/regional positions with national, which is the focus of my question. Just trying to clarify, your yes answer also applies to national candidates as well?

Here's a couple you'd need:
(1) Saying something you are not sure is absolutely true.
(2) Saying you will do something in a campaign and then changing your mind and not following through on it to completion.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

A deliberate untruth. Making a statement, on purpose that is not true.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

"Intent to deceive"? Hard to prove.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Most, if not all politicians are going to fail this test if for the sole reason, most of them at the time they are trying to get elected, do not have enough information to make informed decisions/statements about conditions, and it isn't after they they are elected and get that information, or make the connections, that the shift their position.

Not necessarily because they are "selling out" or some such, but because the better understand the ramifications.

Unfortunately, not enough politicians recognize this, and continue to make statements about absolute outcomes rather than statements about putting forth the effort to understand and temper the decisions on the real information.

There is a significant difference between stating that you will hire no lobbyists to assist with the running of government agencies to clean up the act, and saying there is a problem with the selection of officials and disclosure/transparency of the relationships, and how the decisions are made.

You don't need intent to deceive.

I can say that I had a 3-way with Coro and Taly last night. This, on its face is a lie. That statement contains a deliberate falsehood. It doesn't require any intent other than the statement be false.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

You should be more specific in the scope of your questions, then. That said, I do think it applies to national candidates as well. There are those who get their jobs without lying. That isn't to say that Congress or DC Politics does not corrupt those individuals, but there are those sent to DC on honest terms. They don't last very long if they don't sell out.

_________________

Which is exactly why every successful (high level) politician lies.

FTFY

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

That's changing the game. We started with politicians. Now you just want ones on the national stage. Also, part of lying also means intent to deceive. If we have someone who generally thought "I will do this when elected" but then got into power but couldn't because of something he couldn't control, are they are a liar in your eyes?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Sorry, I thought my original question was fairly clear.



Thanks for your answer.

I'm more inclined to believe that politicians want to be loved and admired and that they actually believe the crap they spew. I'm guessing, but I think they're actually some of the most gullable folks around - they actually believe themselves.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

No, actually I've been talking about the national stage the whole time. Apparently you and Khross didn't see that in my original question.

As to your second question, no I don't think that saying "I'll do this when elected" and then not being able to get it done is lying. However, completely abandoning it and doing something counter to it would be considered lying in my eyes, unless said person came out specifically stating they had a change of heart based on new information they have, etc.

Yeah I think we through Mus in with you on that, sorry.

But, with all being said, yes I think you can get elected without lying. That might mean that you have to word things differently or admit that something you said you were going to do can't be done because of suchandsuch, but I think getting elected can happen.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Yes:

http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/72801

Also Dennis Kucinich is a flaming psychopath and espouses insanity all day long but still gets elected without lying.

_________________

Yes. Intent does not matter.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!