Biggest Lies of '05

Remove all ads!

Here's a Newsweek article on the biggest political lies we've been asked to swallow in 2005. The article speaks for itself, so I have no need to comment.

Read it here.

 

I read the same article with great interest. I wonder what lies we will be hearing in 2006? I fear they will be even bigger than this year's versions from "Nixon 2.0."

 

Be certain to not miss the most important line in the article...

Don't confuse this with news.

 

I notice they attacked Bush more than anyone else. The big lie is that only one side is trying to pull a fast one...

 

[sarcasm] Hmm, could it possibly be because he's done more wrong? No, that can't be it. [/sarcasm]

I suppose now you'll say that people were saying too many bad things about Saddam or Hitler. (Though Bush isn't even close to their level by a long shot, it provides a more concrete example than just the lies Bush is accused of.)

 

I don't hear you disputing any of its content, however...

 

While a valid point, consider that he is the president and so is at the very least one of the most important politicians--or people--in the country, and quite possibly is the single most important. They should pay more attention to him, given his position.

Does anyone give a flying [expletive deleted] about the lies I've told this year? Probably not. Can you guess why?

 

Fel, I was just suggesting that the article neglected lies from Democrats, only really targetting Bush.

 

Ladies and gentlemen (that includes you, Gnarf), let me direct your attention to AMaster's previous post. You need look no further for the reason why Dem lies aren't really paid attention to; the Dems themselves aren't paid attention to. I can't remember a single initiative from their side of the Congress in the past few years. (Of course, I don't pay too much attention to Congress normally anyway, so I could just be missing something.) Do you really give a "flying expletive" if some sit-ins lie?

 

Also, and I hate to say it, but any lies the Democrats tell do not lead to policy. In other words, Bush's lies are used to back up his policies, which he then puts into force. When it is discovered that the policy is in place because of a lie, people get hostile. Even right -- wingers such as myself!!

If and when we get another Democrat in the White House, you can rest assured that HIS (or her, if it turns out to be Hillary) lies will move to center stage.

 

Exactly, LKD - the lies of the incumbent are always "worse" than the opposition's, mainly because the incumbent is usually responsible for the outcome and consequences. As a general rule, I'm as inclined to take the word of a politician (of any persuasion) without substantiation as I am to gnaw my own foot off.

That isn't to say that I don't think the Bush administration would use any method, lie or leverage to get their way, because I do. I think that the esteem of the US presidency has been greatly weakened by this administration, even as the executive branch's powers have increased through rushed legislation and the erosion of personal liberties. They're still flogging the 9/11 horse as justification for their actions, even though they've been forced to confess to having misled the country into war (but not intentionally - they've blamed the intelligence personnel).

BTW, here's my contribution to the "biggest lies" list; it's not as political, though.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/stem-cell-fraud-could-harm-research-experts/2005/12/26/1135445526820.html