Why are the dems so afraid to use the word lie...

[butterfly77]

everytime I see one of them on these talk shows they get on a roll explaining what is wrong and how it got that way,especially when talking about bush and Iraq and then usually Tweety or Wolfe Blitzer say did he lie and they seem to stop dead in their tracks. The repugs know this so they always do it. Did bush fix the intellegence yes, so he lies . I am tired of hearing he mislead us (lie) he didn't tell the truth (lie) he wasn't honest with us (lie)he led us down the wrong path (lie).


Here's another one that stops them: You voted for this war didn't you? Answer should be: Yes, I vote for a pack of lies then spell them out. Notice how repugs always switch the blame to CIA or Say, I don't know anything about it, this is to give them time to fix up there lies with the rest of the gang congress and bush admin
Notice how Rumsfeld blames everybody and acts like he dosen't know, or he does like bush gets angry, so the reporter is intimidated. we don't need anymore Panilla ass senators and congress men and women speak up its time to tell it like it is no more beating around the BUSH!

[indepat]

1. Dems still try to be polite and use little niceties while being savaged

[LostInAnomie]

2. If you call someone a liar you have to prove it.

They can go right up to the line of it but not cross.

[dennis4868]

15. WHAT IS SO HARD ABOUT....

proving it? There is plenty of evidence now....

[sandnsea]

3. Because it isn't that simple

For ever 50 times they said mushroom cloud there's that one time in the bunker that said "could be" and clearly that isn't a lie. They hyped and exagerrated and terrified and MISLED, that's why that's the word that is used.

Besides, what's it matter which word is used? Isn't the important thing that they're being exposed?

[butterfly77]

4. Yeah . It matters when debating these

pugs, they are really baiting them trying to make them say lie and as far as I am concerned misleading is lying. You say tomato I say toe-motoe lets call the whole thing off.

[dennis4868]

17. it was not simply misleading....

it was flat out lying and why the dems cannot use that L word (except for Hoaward Dean) i just do not understand...Dems are whimps for the most part.

[dennis4868]

16. but they did lie.....it is that simple.

i could give many examples....for example, here is one. The Air Force branch of intelligence said that Iraq had no UAV that could carry WMD to our country...No NIE said that it could. Yet Bush and Cheney said that Iraq had UAV that could do this and scared the shit out of everyone....a lie is a lie....i could give you 1000s more example but do not have the time now.

[NanceGreggs]

5. If the Dems call this Admin 'liars' ...

... it gets this Admin's (dwindling) supporters' backs up, and it dissolves into name-calling and he said/she said rhetoric.

It's better to let the public come to the 'liar' conclusion on their own -- which more and more of them are doing. And the poll numbers reflect that on a daily basis.

[butterfly77]

6. Boy, I didn't realize how many

blind, dumb, and stupid people are in this country. Oh! let me be politically correct I didn't realize how many people in this country are unaware of their surroundings.

[The Magistrate]

7. Both Excellent Points, Ma'am

The word "lie" is much superior, having fewer syllables then the alternatives, and so carrying the point more quickly and directly to the hearer. People like plain talk, and rally to those who use it.

"The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between the lightening and the lightening bug."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[butterfly77]

10. EXACTLY!

they don't give a damn about what they say about dems they are playing games with us. Thats why dems are complaining about them not fighting back. Here's another thing they love to say: What is your plan ,as soon as dems say something they use portions of it modified or changed to fit their agenda, and then they throw it back in their faces.

They don't bite their lips when they say: freedom fries. Latte drinkers, cowards, unpatriotic, unamerican and this is the one that gets me: They are talking against our soldiers, Don't Democrats/ liberals have children over there and aren't some of the soldiers liberals are they calling the lib soldiers cowards, the hypocritical phonies.

[AZBlue]

8. Because if you call someone a liar publicly you have to have 100%...

...irrefutable, solid, no-room-for-discussion evidence. We've seen some strong evidence, but nothing that's absolute and without some holes. Otherwise you not only open yourself up to a law suit but you also undermine your word and integrity, which as a public figure is all you have.

[The Magistrate]

9. Public Figures Cannot Sue, Ma'am

Our political life would be very different if that were noit the case; most political operatives of both parties would be bankrupts.

The basic principle of the game is this: the strongest possible charge shoudl be levelled as frequently as possible; any attempt to refute it should be ignored and replied to with a further re-iteration of the charge....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[butterfly77]

11. I second those principles or ...

is that emotions.

You know you sound like gore vidal is that you sir? anyway I agree.

[AZBlue]

12. Hmmmm....couldn't they sue the media outlet carrying the statement?

Or is that only if the media outlet itself made the claim, not an interviewee or third party?

Plus, I see your point, and I like the basis behind it. But, when it's taken to an extreme don't you then have Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, who don't really care for facts or truth, just innuendo and implications. It's a fine line and one that's easy to cross.

[The Magistrate]

13. Not Really, Ma'am

There was an old case from the sixties decided in such a way that a statement made about a public political figure had to be not only known to be utterly false by the publisher or circulator of it, but published or circulated as a deliberate act of malice as well. It is a standard almost impossible to ever prove.

The unfortunate fact is that the style employed by the likes of Limbaugh works: the continued repetition of flamboyant attacks sticks them firmly in the hearer's mind, and makes them part of people's mental furniture, regardless of their accuracy. Indeed, falsity somewhat assists the effect: for the falsity of a thing is hard to argue conclusively, and can confuse the person defending against a charge over how to deal with it, since it has no real basis.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[dennis4868]

18. yes....

we have seen plenty of evidence that is "absolute and without some holes"....let me know if you want many examples of this.....my gosh have you not been reading and watching the news lately?

[RazzleDazzle]

14. Among members of Congress, there are rules of civility and decorum

that they have to follow when on the floor of the House and Senate, and I think there's a lot of carryover to outside of those chambers as well. It might even be requited.

Remember too that you have to be able to show intent to deceive when you charge "lie." That can be very difficult to do.

[TayTay]

19. Because that implies that they can prove it

The Dems want hearings so that mislead can go to intentionally mislead which will then equal lie.

We need hearings and we need to get the whole story out for more than just the people who have never bought the Bush story anyway.