My column Friday touched on various evidence — including Judge Samuel Alito’s faulty memory and the controversy over a fictional nonfiction book — that we are living in an age of “truthiness,” the useful word coined by Comedy Central fake news host Stephen Colbert (in photo) to describe a state of wishing or believing something to be true, with little regard for fact or evidence.
One reader said I had missed a glaring example of misdirection from the Clintons: Hillary brazenly repeating “I just don’t remember” to congressional requests for information about her indicted husband.
He’s right — the Clintons had more than a few moments of truthiness. Democrats are hardly immune from its fuzzy charms. But I think President Bush has raised truthiness to an art form with his stubborn and well-documented disregard of facts.
I welcome your truths on this topic.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- situveux1 on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
60 Comments
No matter the party, it’s all politics.
There are many examples where “truthfulness” is misconstrued, Political correctness is one. The concept was sound, the taking into account how others may feel at what they see, hear or read. But it is primary in regards to the use of generally stereo-types. And words that are meant to insult, degrade or depict others in a view that is not factual. But it has been taken to the extreme of you can not say anything, such as if someone act lazy and it happens that they are black, if you express that the person is being lazy you are called down for being a racist. When in fact it is not about the color of their skin but it is about their work ethic.
The latest wiretapping issues real is a prime example of wishful thinking, though the law gives the lawful way to acquire a wiretap even in an emergency. The Bush administration reads into a law what they want to and then goes what ever way that seem fit for their desire. In “Against all Enemies” written by Richard A. Clarke. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and G.W. Bush all wished for it to have been Saddam and Iraq that had committed 9-11. To the point that they were all fighting to have the invasion of Iraq even though all of the evidence pointed to Al-Qaeda and Afghanistan. Their unreasoning hatred for Saddam had colored their every thought to the point that in spite of the evidence. They said that the first terrorists attack on the World trade center was Saddam. “Just because there is no evidence, does not mean he did not do it!”, was Rumsfeld response when it was pointed out that it was a unknown group at the time (Al-Qaeda) who had committed the act. “a state of wishing or believing something to be true, with little regard for fact or evidence.“, was the way it was put in the article. Yes reality can get in the way of what you want to believe sometimes
Well, Randy, I firmly believe that truth is very important to our society, except in instances where it might be theoretically necessary to lie. I’m afraid I really can’t discuss the specifics, as I might need to make a decision regarding them at a later date.
This is off topic, but only slightly.
Did anyone notice there is a new addition to the patriot act? It’s for disrupters. Who you might ask would be considered a disrupter? A protester at one of Bush’s events, or even better yet. Someone they expect ‘might’ disrupt an event.
How far away would the disrupters be to being considered enemy combatants with all the rights revoked?
Maybe Paul Mirecki could give a lecture on the topic ;-)
Randy, could you expand on this a little? “well-documented disregard of facts.”
The reason I ask is that there are so many on the left who are absolutely convinced that “Bush Lied” about this or that, even when the facts prove them wrong. So its a little hard to comment on this without you listing the specific instances of what you contend Bush was less than truthfull about.
Heckler, it’s called “Google.”
People like Heckler that live in their own world of reality remind me of Bush on his latest truthful statement about New Orleans.
“It’s a heck of a place to bring your family” direct quote from Bush’s latest photo op.
What reality are they looking at. You only have to talk to the people who are trying to put their lives back together to know that is a false statement.
Which is scarier, that Bush believes his own false statements, or that people like Heckler swallow it all hook, line and sinker?
Good grief Sum1, are you so desperate to be critical cool that you have to make up something to attack? What is “scary” is that so many believe on this blog everything in the WEBlog lead-ins because it is usually what they want to hear. Heckler just ask a reasonable question. (to which he will never get a reasonable answer) What is left unsaid often speaks louder than what is.
Heckler, really, if you are serious and not just heckling and being a troll, go to Google and type in “bush lies”. See how many are there.
Just in case you want a suggestion on where to start, go here:
http://www.bushlies.net/pages/10/
It is a list of the top ten lies. The full list is just too long to print….
Sigh. . .could someone else take this one? I’m behind in my work. Thanks.
Read my mind, farmgrrl! (Posted at the same time).
Okay, just to even the playing field:http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/LIES.html
If it’s a politician, it probably lied.
Just in case any of you have a problem with reading comprehension I was addressing my question to Randy. I really don’t expect to get an answer but hey, you never know.
If you really want to talk about lies, look to Mr. Bill, he’s the King. Or to just about any Democrat when they talk about gun control.
Have a nice day y’all. I’ll be back if Randy speaks.
Walker, buddy, with all due respect, two wrongs dont make a right. Yes, Clinton lied and got impeached by the house. But I understand most conservatives think Bush is better than Clinton. I am shocked, I say, SHOCKED that someone would say Bush is no better than Bill.
When is turnabout going to be fairplay? I am waiting for the impeachment hearings, once the majority of the ruling party scrub themselves of the Abramoff stink.
At least Clinton supporters admit he lied. When will the bushies acknowledge the “truthiness” of his words? When will they admit that Shrub, er, his speechwriters, lie?
Good post as usual, FarmGirl.
Look at the State of the Union address last year. Everything Bush said that could be proven true or false was either false or misleading.
For instance, he said that the economy had created 2.3 million jobs. Technically that’s true. But he neglected to point out that the economy LOST 2.3 million jobs in the previous three years for a net job creation of zero.
He also didn’t point out that 800,000 new jobs he created by growing gov’t some 9 percent a year–they were gov’t jobs, not private sector jobs.
Then he got to Social Security. Don’t get me started. That was nothing but a crock of crap from top to bottom–SS is “going broke,” it will pay out more than it takes in in 2017. Oh, really, what about the other 14 times SS paid out more than it took in? What about the fact that SS will still operate in surplus until 2028 even using the same statitics the President used?
No one has lied to the American people with such regularity and impunity as our Liar-in-Chief. Machivelli, meet your match . . . George W. Bush.
ksfarmgrrl
Sorry, I lied, just couldnt stay away.
I credit Bill and his art of lying with getting me interested in politics. I would watch him say one thing one day and seemingly say the exact opposite a week or on a few occasion, a day later…and the news media would say nothing… I was utterly amazed.
Now Bill did’nt consider them lies because he had this pathalogical habit of putting “weasel words”(words to which he assigned a different meaning to than was commonly considered correct)into many of his statements. In his own mind he really didn’t think he was lying.
To paraphrase one of my favorites, ‘I’ve worked harder than I ever have in my life to find a way to balance this budget without raising your taxes but I just can’t find a way.’ ( he had made a sort’of promise not to raise taxes during the campaign)
Well, Heckler, unless you’re very wealthy, he didn’t raise YOUR taxes.
And if you are wealthy, well then quitcher bitching and count yer blessings.
Lastly, I guess you like Bush’s rhetoric better–referring to Congress’s spending, “there’s a new sheriff in town, one that’s dedicated for fiscal responsibility.”
Now we’ve got historic high budget deficit and historic high national debt (as percentage of GDP) and two unfunded wars.
How many people died as result of Bill Clintons lies?
Christ, you folks are all so cranky this morning, WTF!!!
Heckler, bashing bill isnt the same as defending George. How about defending your boy? That would be a nice change instead of the usual “well he did it too mama” whine you nancy boys always use. :)(no offense to nancy boys.)
Wanna tell me again how good Bush is?
ksfarmgrrl ProudLiberal
Well I went to Bushlies.net and what did I find? I found that leftwingers hold Bush to a totally different standard of what a lie “IS” than they apply to themselves. What a joke.
ProudLiberal, I’ll give you credit, you at least gave some specific examples of what you’re talking about. But when you start talking about job numbers and S/S numbers your talking Washington spin and numbers games, you can’t get straight numbers out of anyone. If you call those lies then I guess everyone in the US House and Senate are liars.
Notice how it always comes back to Clinton if you’re a republican? Always. By extension, I guess it’s really Clinton’s fault that we went to war in the first place. Folks (conservatives), I’m TIRED of the way you use Clinton as justification for the Bush lies. Clinton is gone…get over it. Your boy Bush is a liar.
Deciding which political party lied more than the other is an awful lot of fun even if futile. A couple things about the exec. office. I think lying about your self (pot smoking, sexual daliences) is sleazy but not on the same level with lies about matters of state. Both guys have done both. But, more generally I wonder why we now have truthiness. Is it a fall out of post-modernism? There is no Truth, and facts are really just how you interpret them is a simplistic post-modern view. I am not saying the Truth equalls Christianity, like a lot of pastor’s are asserting. But I think there is a link between the two phenomenon. 1) Secular society has decided there are no facts that we can agree on, there is only spin and opinion. We only have to accept truths that match our opinions. 2) Humans know that we have to have agreed upon truths to function in society, Fox et al. are the ones convincing people that their truth is the truth. The real problem is that instead of dealing with Bush’s truthiness, the believers in Right and Wrong just believe anything he says.
XXX
For one thing Clinton set the standard by which all who follow will be measured. And he’s not gone, he keeps popping up like a pimple on the face of America.
For the other thing you folks use a standard for what a lie “IS” (note the gratuitous use of the Clinton moniker) that you routinely refuse to apply to members of your own political persuasion. How do you expect to be taken seriously?
Allie
Bravo, very good analysis, though I disagree with your final conclusion.
I think what has a lot of Christians up in arms is that they see secularists pushing hard to create a world in which there is no Right and Wrong except what is defined as Right and Wrong by the so-called Intelligencia. (similar to but more expansive than the Political Correctness movement).
They fear, as did the founders of this nation, a society with no moral anchor, where Right and Wrong are fluid and arbitrary rather than based on a Judeo/Christian moral ethos, or on a “Natural Rights” principle (the basis for much of our legal system).
Allie,Of course politicians lie! They do it because we, the voters demand it. We vote for the candidate who tells us what we want to hear, no matter how preposterous. The candidate who tells it like it is has blown any chance of getting elected. Change in Washington, and the statehouses, begins at home! When we are ready to face the truth, maybe we’ll get some.
A little off subject, but when Clinton would lie, he’d get a red band (rash?) across his forehead. So how can one tell when Bush is lying? His lips are moving.
So, Heckler concedes that Bush lies but justifies it because Clinton did too.
Okay, well . . . that’s a start. At least you admit that Bush lies routinely.
You and JoeBlow / esod / nathan should have a nice long argument about it . . . they won’t even admit that Bush lied EVER?
Bunch of schlemiels . . .
Heckler, wrong as usual.
“For the other thing you folks use a standard for what a lie “IS” (note the gratuitous use of the Clinton moniker) that you routinely refuse to apply to members of your own political persuasion.”
I’ve said numerous times in other threads that they’re mostly all dirty (politicians) one way or another.But you repubs need to get over Clinton as an excuse. That doesn’t excuse lying, and if Bush’s lips are moving, he’s lying. There’s a major difference. Bush’s lies are getting a lot of people killed.
“well-documented disregard of facts?”
If you mean all that crap you liberals think are the facts, then yeah I suppose you are right Randy.
Here’s some “truthiness”
It is inconceivable that a United States president and a Secretary of State would pay homage to this monster, or have the nerve to call him “a man of peace.”
Of Sharon’s Brutalities, Failures
You cannot overstate how much Palestinians loathe the man. His life-long war against them began with dreadful massacres, proceeded on to land grabs, and ended with a fraudulent disengagement plan designed to put their dream of independence, as one of his top advisers called it, in “formaldehyde.”Among the many massacres, raids and “mopping up” operations Sharon mounted against the people of Palestine, the one inscribed in their collective memory — on a par with Deir Yassein — none matches the one in the village of Qibya in the West Bank, perpetrated by Israel’s Unit 101, which he commanded, on the night of Oct. 15, 1953.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=76096&d=11&m=1&y=2006
They all lie. Everybody lies. Even everybody that posted here, including myself.
If you say you have never lied, then you have lied.
;)
“Truthiness” { This is funny }
Pat Robertson and his “wallet” are welcomed back to Israel{ “show me the money” }http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/670183.html
ksfarmgrrl,I am neither a bushie, nor am I a clintonite. The blog seemed to me to be about politicians lying. Anyone with any sense at all knows Bush lies. So did Clinton. I believe I said, “level the playing field”. Which is what I did.
I never claimed one or the other is a bigger liar, or a worse person. What I said was: “If it’s a politician, it probably lied.” I believe that statement to be true. Nowhere do I even contend in any way that one party is better or worse than the other. I believe I made my point. If you want to read something else into it, be my guest.
Sometimes a simple statement is just that: a simple statement. But it appears that when politics are involved, nothing is simple.
Randy and the rest of the Eagle staff invented “truthiness”.
Truthiness
Bush, Sharon, and the Neoconservatives have brought American politics to a place of disbelief, when viewed objectively. America’s longstanding values are being seriously challenged.
Bush has all but abandoned American vestiges of good government while following Sharon to some decayed state of morality. The agonies of torture, hideously developed in facility 1391 in Israel, act more as a catalyst for changing America’s military, in ways previously deplored and found unlawful, to a conduct in a heretofore unimagined cruelty.
We are evolving ourselves into the very enemy we held-up to ridicule in our long history.
Religious leaders are the worse of our lot, we expect it. From those child molesters to carnival hustlers, our institutions, it seems, have somehow betrayed us all, for not keeping pace with reality. Finding ourselves immersed in a technology we don’t understand, the side effect of which offer unlimited power without the restraints of a moral compass, leaves no light at the end of our dark tunnel.
Perhaps the only morality left is to fine-tune road-rage.
Somebody way up-thread was asking Randy to back up his assertions about Bush’s dissembling. This is from Randy’s article that I just now read.
“It [truthiness] might be the perfect word to describe the Bush era, when faith-based assertions and ideological wish fulfillment have replaced facts and evidence as a basis for policy.”No weapons of mass destruction? It didn’t matter anyway. Not if you believe.”Global warming? So what if you have a preponderance of facts on your side? According to the president, that doesn’t make it real.”Intelligent design? It’s kind of like Science Lite, with fewer fact-calories to weigh you down.”Torture? We don’t do it, despite evidence to the contrary.”
I fail to see that these are unreasonable assertions of Bush’s truthiness.
Here it is the end of week 2, of the new year, and it’s still a steller year for Bush. The stock market is up, Alito will be confirmed, more top Al-Qaeda leaders have been taken out and all you cry babies can do is claim he lied. That is so last year. Get a new mantra, your’s hasn’t worked and will not work.
21 American soldiers died this week. 200 had their arms and legs blown-off. some were blinded, some were nutered, some will take a little longer to die.
They died for the farce of “terrorism” created by Israel.
And we’re all cry babies?
“and it’s still a steller year for Bush.”
Happy–
New Zogby Poll Shows Majority of Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping
By a margin of 52% to 43%, Americans want Congress to impeach President Bush if he wiretapped American citizens without a judge’s approval, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003.
The poll was conducted by Zogby International, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,216 U.S. adults from January 9-12.
The poll found that 52% agreed with the statement:”If President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment.”
******
Another “great year” like that one, and Bush will be out on his a$$ and more disgraced than Nixon.
Dear Randy,
You claim your memory isn’t what it used to be? I believe you! You obviously can’t remember anything of importance from the Senate hearings long enough to write a column!
Senator Kennedy used Alito’s membership in CAP merely to imply that Alito was racist and sexist. His only purpose was to give the liberal lapdogs in the press fodder to impugn Alito’s character. Right on cue, like the good left-wing propagandist that you are, you come up with your inane, idiotic column.
Let’s just apply a few facts to this whole CAP topic, shall we?
Unlike the way you characterized this group as a “campus conservative group”, this was an alumni organization that was not officially connected with Princeton. Being a member was less important than being a member of the Book-of-the-Month club.
It did not oppose the “increased admissions of women and minorities” as you reported. It apposed quotas in admissions.
The documents that Senator Kennedy made such a fool of himself over by demanding a “subpoena” for were actually a matter of public record and did not provide any evidence that Sam Alito had any thing to do with the policies or organization of CAP. His name was not even mentioned in them.
Now we could go over the disgraceful performance of the democrats on the judicial committee on each of the topics they thought were so important, but their motives were crystal clear. Their purpose was not to perform their constitutional duty of advice and consent, it was to defame the character and destroy the reputation of a man that they all agreed was qualified to be on the Supreme Court.
So what did we learn from the hearings? Well we now know that the democrats feel that a drug dealer should be allowed to hide drugs in the various body orifices of a ten-year-old child with impunity.
We know that democrats believe that it is perfectly OK for a judge to move the court to the left, like Ruth Bader-Ginsburg, but that it is a mortal sin to go right.
We have learned that the democrats care more about criminal’s rights than the protection of crime victims.
But the most important thing we have learned is that democrats cannot be trusted with the security of the nation.
And we have learned that unable to accept the truth of the hearings our local editor finds the need to make things up to write about. Truthiness, a good word for you Randy.Hank Price
The man has done his research . . . I’ll give him that. You’ve been listening to Rush and Bill overtime, my friend.
I love having the right wing tell me what I believe. I now believe that drug dealers should be able to hide drugs in the body cavities of 10 year olds.
Thanks for that, Hank. I didn’t know that was a liberal position.
I suppose it is a step up from “hating America,” “blaming America first,” “supporting Al Qaeda,” “hating our troops,” and “wanting to turn the land of the free into socialized Europe.”
Oh, I also have declared “war on Christmas.”
Almost forgot that one while I was taking down the tree and putting away the Christmas cards I sent out . . .
Dearest Proud Liberal,
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. You will notice that it was addressed to Randy and it was about the disgraceful performance of the democrats on the Senate Judicial Committee.
I opolgize if you have taken offence personnaly, none intended.
Hank
PL, 52% of Americans are still Americans. That’s the underlying result of that Zogby poll.
The other 42% started a new country on 9/11.
The 52% have not sold-out America, because the opportunity, or better yet, the excuse presented itself to trade-off America for a Nazi-styled government where a G-d constitution gets into their way as of 9/11.
We’re still Americans, they’re the enemy.
I’m about 90% on board with that, Ed.
I definitely agree that 52% of Americans are still Americans, and 42% have gone off the deep end. For that 42%, fear has apparently driven them to discount rather than embrace the US constitution. And all it took was 20 guys with box cutters and the DHS, sheesh.
“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” has never been so true as it is here in 2006.
Nice post.
The enemy’s battle-cry is “we can’t go back to Sept 10.” That’s why they keep generating fear about being attacked by “terrorists.”
There are no “terrorists,” there are however Arabs under assault and when they fight back the conveniently called “terrorists” to keep the fear going.
This Israel farce has been going-on for years with the Palestinians being called “terrorists”
The Butcher Ariel Sharon has been provoking Palestinians for over 60 years, but until 9/11 in was just a local massacre. 9/11 turned it into a worldwide massacre, and that’s why, in all likelihood Sharon Mossad was behind that attack.
We can go back to the peace of Sept 10 by simply making peace with the Arabs, something which the Israeli Zionist Likuds do not want under any circumstances.
Well, Hank, that was very reasonable of you.
Thanks for the clarification.
Glad to help
Speaking of “truthiness”, it seems we’ve been presented with another Bush Lie. NSA began spying on American citizens BEFORE 9/11(shortly after Bush took office. go figure).
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011306Z.shtml
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB24/nsa25.pdf
Hank and Heckler are dittohead Hannitized morons. And yes hank and heckler I will tell you that to your face. It is shameful and sad that you post here only what you are told. But of course as good little Republicans you either do the telling what to do to those under your shadow, or slavishly embrace what your master tells you to do. And so you are not in any position to discuss “truth”. Such as you either enforce their own “truth” or embrace the “truth” forced on you by your own ignorance and sublimation.
I apologize the big words. Maybe you can get your boss to define them…..or maybe not.
An extended Pakistani family sat down for dinner when suddenly an American bomb came crashing through their roof killing 17 men, women and children, while injuring many.
No matter that Al-Qaida only exists in the minds and on CIA/Mossad websites, the cover-story was attempting to kill a number 2 leader.
A Leader of what? Someone who doesn’t like the United States and is willing to say so?
Impeach Bush and we may have Cheney securely at the Oval Office until 2012, since now he CAN run for presidency. Forget impeachment, what we need is for some true patriots to reclaim the government and rescue the Constitution. Wait, under the Patriot Act that is seditional act. I give up…
I say gather the facts, draw out the investigation, (there is so much more to learn about this most corrupt and inept administration in history) and impeach bush long about oh say September 2007.
I find it a tad ironic that ol’ hank is posting again and especially in a thread about “tuthiness”. Uh hank? Did your absence help you decide whether you are the old VFW guy or the marine stationed without a base in Kansas? Or if that ‘marine” is your son or you or both?
Oh what a tangled web we weave……….
We’re after Al-Qaida’s #2 man again? The guy must be a cat. We’ve captured or killed him at least a half dozen times. I do wonder when this administration is going to get tired of shoveling… Or better yet, when are the citizens of this country going to wake up and realize they’ve taken shovelful after shovelful of the same stuff, and never realized they keep accepting the same lie, over and over again? GWB may have a bad memory, but I don’t.
I have been reading Peter Bergen’s _The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Quaeda’s Leader_. If I was asked which would be best taken out: al Zawahiri or bin Laden?
I would without qualification suggest al Zawahiri. I think he is much more dangerous than bin Laden. I think his hate and dangerousness derives from his years of imprisonment and torture in an Egyptian prison.
The aurhotities stripped al Zawahiri naked, shocked him with electricity, turned wild dogs on him while he was naked. Kind of reminds one of torture done at another place? Like Abu Ghraid, maybe?
Not producing more madmen like al Zawahiri would in itself be a good reason to get out of Iraq.
Ain’t the results of torture wonderful?! And the more we do it more of these guys we create. Gives job security to our “leaders” (sic)
Steven E. al Zawahiri { the name we’re given by our not-so trustworthy government } is not a madman, he is an angry man.
And there is no such thing as a “terrorist,” only angry men.
The “war on terrorism” is a phony war to hide the sins of Bush and his Jew-buddies, who made-up this nonsense.
You’re being “had.”
Ariel Sharon, from age 15-77, some 62 years, has been creating angry men, women and children using the most horrific brutality, much worse the Hitler ever thought about. Hitler did abide by international law and the Geneva conventions and was a good guy when compared to the Zionist Jews.
The big lie is from our MSM. A lie by omission, by not reporting the truth.
The reason Bush is after the number 2 Al-Qaida leader is that there are only two left, and Bush can’t find, or get the Israelis to give-up number 1.
Arab want-ads are always asking for a new number 2:-}