Comments on: lies lies lies lies lies lies

lies lies lies lies lies lies

luser — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 13:43:09 -0800

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: shutyomouf@hotmail.com - pw:shaftbaby)

By: phong3d

phong3d — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:12:14 -0800

Oddly enough, I'm listening to the Violent Femmes right now.

By: malphigian

malphigian — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:39:23 -0800

Also immensely useful (and a lot more in depth) about exposing lies and distortions on both sides: http://www.factcheck.org/

By: contessa

contessa — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:31:46 -0800

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.

By: logovisual

logovisual — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:52:18 -0800

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?

By: 327.ca

327.ca — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:57:34 -0800

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.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:38:59 -0800

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. :-/