lies lies lies lies lies lies

September 30, 2004 1:43 PM

An excellent WashPost primer on the lies each candidate is currently telling about the other, and how they hold up to reality. Also, enjoy the many euphemisms employed to avoid the "L" word: (Misleading. Inaccurate. Oversimplified. Exaggerated. Carefully selected. Unfair. etc etc) Who will be the first mainstream media outlet to state plainly that a politician has told a lie? Login: [e-mail] - pw:shaftbaby)
posted by luser (6 comments total)

Oddly enough, I'm listening to the Violent Femmes right now.
posted by phong3d at 2:12 PM on September 30, 2004

Also immensely useful (and a lot more in depth) about exposing lies and distortions on both sides:
http://www.factcheck.org/
posted by malphigian at 2:39 PM on September 30, 2004

Perhaps I'm biased (OK - strike that, I know I am) but Kerry's lies don't seem as egregious or blatantly misleading as Bush's are. What the article ignored completely, though, is Bush's way of prefacing his pronouncements with ridiculous phrases like "enemies of freedom" before he slips in one of his dubious facts. People who are receptive to the first part of his statement ("Yes! Those people hate freedom!") soak up the second part like a sponge, almost hypnotically. It's kind of creepy.

Kerry, to his credit, doesn't play by those rules, which unfortunately turns some people off. He has a firm grasp on all the issues and his prefaces are like little history or policy lessons. The sponge people quickly grow bored and tune him out.

Nevertheless, I'm totally going to be playing this game while I watch the debate tonight.
posted by contessa at 3:31 PM on September 30, 2004

Nice link, thanks. Between this and the debating-styles writeup by James Fallows posted yesterday, it's refreshing to read some honest-to-God journalism in the run-up to the debates. Everybody remembers journalism, right? Strong stuff, wasn't it?
posted by logovisual at 3:52 PM on September 30, 2004

First I've heard of this story: Diane Feinstein alleges that White House staff wrote large parts of Allawi's speech to Congress.

Her letter was a response to an article appearing in Thursday's Washington Post, which also alleged that Allawi was coached by US officials -- including Dan Senor, former spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq-- in perfecting his delivery of the speech delivered before a joint session of Congress one week ago.

posted by 327.ca at 3:57 PM on September 30, 2004

Mind, the WP article is a little misleading in some ways, too:

Kerry, meanwhile, emphasizes the loss of 2.7 million manufacturing jobs since Bush took office, which overstates the total job loss and ignores the historical trend toward service-oriented jobs.

A statement that itself neglects to point out that the historical trend towards service-oriented jobs is a trend toward lower paying jobs at the same time. A unionized steelworker sure made a helluva lot more money than a McService employee.

I suspect much the same can be identified throughout the article. What's not being said is as important as what is being said. :-/
posted by five fresh fish at 5:38 PM on September 30, 2004