For those of you who think Obama is a liar...

[Jackson]

Wow. Thanks for the link. I didn't expect Politifact to catch so many of Obama's lies. I've probably noticed some they haven't but kudos to them for acknowledging so many of them.

I think most of the lies that politicians tell are campaign-related.

So that's what you 'think' now, huh?
Obama has never been out of campaign mode with his speeches

I feel as you do and there is the difference between Gingrich and Obama. Gingrich will take it on the chin without changing his speeches to match the audience he addresses.

Just the most notable example of the hypocrisy that Obama emits is supporting the OWS in one speech after another, commending them for using their right for free speech and then demanding they not show up in the city where the convention takes place at that time.

Just think about it.

 

[Billy000]

It is not partisan to recognize fudging of the truth as falsehood.

You are betraying your own lack of understanding of how liars accomplish their goals.

It is not black and white.

Obama is a skilled distorter of the truth.

He spent all those years in school and at lecterns learning how to effectively communicate what he wants to communicate, how to include just enough truth to make it believable to those who are susceptible to being awed by his rhetoric and who are willing to not look beneath the surface and challenge the details.



Now that you have confirmed your youth it is not so scary that you excuse partial truths as irrelevant to this debate. It's understandable at your stage in life.

But half-true is still wrong. It's still unworthy. Obama should use his intellect to be more truthful, not to figure out how to sandwich lies in between truths, and not to try to slither around the questionable statements when he's challenged on them.

Again, if we are comparing one politician (Obama), to another politician, Obama has integrity. Has Obama purposefully disorted the truth? Of course he has. He is a politician.

You also must keep in my mind that politicans are not always perfect when it comes to trying to tell the truth. Often times there are simply facts they are missing out on.

And Christ, don't use my youth as an excuse that I don't know what I am talking about. That is such a cop-out.

Sorry. Gotta use your youth. Because that is the only way you get credit for the naive (and false) claim that Obama has integrity and that "Mostly True" and "Half True" are irrelevant in the assessment of someone's veracity.

If you don't understand that Mostly True and Half True are KEY to how liars sell their wares, then you are ignorant.

Youth is an excuse for ignorance. If you continue to believe as you do for the next 10 years, then you will be inexcusably ignorant.


But excusable or not, your current position is ignorant. Plain and simple.

And yet, despite the fact that this older woman is telling me I am wrong, I still remain unconvinced. Why? Because I am basing it off of numbers. You are basing my naiveness on opinion.

And, youre right: half truths are wrong. Mostly truths are not, however.

 

[Amelia]

Again, if we are comparing one politician (Obama), to another politician, Obama has integrity. Has Obama purposefully disorted the truth? Of course he has. He is a politician.

You also must keep in my mind that politicans are not always perfect when it comes to trying to tell the truth. Often times there are simply facts they are missing out on.

And Christ, don't use my youth as an excuse that I don't know what I am talking about. That is such a cop-out.

Sorry. Gotta use your youth. Because that is the only way you get credit for the naive (and false) claim that Obama has integrity and that "Mostly True" and "Half True" are irrelevant in the assessment of someone's veracity.

If you don't understand that Mostly True and Half True are KEY to how liars sell their wares, then you are ignorant.

Youth is an excuse for ignorance. If you continue to believe as you do for the next 10 years, then you will be inexcusably ignorant.


But excusable or not, your current position is ignorant. Plain and simple.

And yet, despite the fact that this older woman is telling me I am wrong, I still remain unconvinced. Why? Because I am basing it off of numbers. You are basing my naiveness on opinion.

And, youre right: half truths are wrong. Mostly truths are not, however.

You remain unconvinced partly because that's what humans do. We dig in during a fight. Later, in reflective moments, truth has more of a chance to dawn.

Of the statements politifact chose to vet, they rated Obama's position as True less than 25% of the time.

You are casting out evidence of Obama's careless mishandling of the truth to bolster your numbers. You served up the evidence of Obama's lack of integrity on a silver platter, and you don't even recognize it. That's good stuff there.



I know I won't change your position. However, now I understand better how you come by it. That's about as much as I can expect.

Have a lovely day.

 

[Billy000]

Sorry. Gotta use your youth. Because that is the only way you get credit for the naive (and false) claim that Obama has integrity and that "Mostly True" and "Half True" are irrelevant in the assessment of someone's veracity.

If you don't understand that Mostly True and Half True are KEY to how liars sell their wares, then you are ignorant.

Youth is an excuse for ignorance. If you continue to believe as you do for the next 10 years, then you will be inexcusably ignorant.


But excusable or not, your current position is ignorant. Plain and simple.

And yet, despite the fact that this older woman is telling me I am wrong, I still remain unconvinced. Why? Because I am basing it off of numbers. You are basing my naiveness on opinion.

And, youre right: half truths are wrong. Mostly truths are not, however.

You remain unconvinced partly because that's what humans do. We dig in during a fight. Later, in reflective moments, truth has more of a chance to dawn.

Of the statements politifact chose to vet, they rated Obama's position as True less than 25% of the time.

You are casting out evidence of Obama's carelessness to bolster your numbers. You served up the evidence of Obama's lack of integrity on a silver platter, and you don't even recognize it. That's good stuff there.



I know I won't change your position. However, now I understand better how you come by it. That's about as much as I can expect.

Have a lovely day.

I am not going to re-explain this bull 25% crap. Read the conversation I had with, Windbag.

So since humans are hard to convince, what does that say about you? You haven't conceded on anything you have said.

 

[Amelia]

And yet, despite the fact that this older woman is telling me I am wrong, I still remain unconvinced. Why? Because I am basing it off of numbers. You are basing my naiveness on opinion.

And, youre right: half truths are wrong. Mostly truths are not, however.

You remain unconvinced partly because that's what humans do. We dig in during a fight. Later, in reflective moments, truth has more of a chance to dawn.

Of the statements politifact chose to vet, they rated Obama's position as True less than 25% of the time.

You are casting out evidence of Obama's carelessness to bolster your numbers. You served up the evidence of Obama's lack of integrity on a silver platter, and you don't even recognize it. That's good stuff there.



I know I won't change your position. However, now I understand better how you come by it. That's about as much as I can expect.

Have a lovely day.

I am not going to re-explain this bull 25% crap. Read the conversation I had with, Windbag.

So since humans are hard to convince, what does that say about you? You haven't conceded on anything you have said.

I will give you a concession. I will give Obama a 57% true rating using Politifact's numbers, instead of a 24% rating.

I get that by weighting his ratings. I count his Mostly True statements as 80% true, his Half True statements as 50% and his Mostly False statements as 20% true. Then divide that by the total number of statements rated.


(80+74*.8+79*.5+42*.2)/(80+74+79+42+51+4) = 0.566969697


And with that I bow out of the conversation.

 

[Billy000]

You remain unconvinced partly because that's what humans do. We dig in during a fight. Later, in reflective moments, truth has more of a chance to dawn.

Of the statements politifact chose to vet, they rated Obama's position as True less than 25% of the time.

You are casting out evidence of Obama's carelessness to bolster your numbers. You served up the evidence of Obama's lack of integrity on a silver platter, and you don't even recognize it. That's good stuff there.



I know I won't change your position. However, now I understand better how you come by it. That's about as much as I can expect.

Have a lovely day.

I am not going to re-explain this bull 25% crap. Read the conversation I had with, Windbag.

So since humans are hard to convince, what does that say about you? You haven't conceded on anything you have said.

I will give you a concession. I will give Obama a 57% true rating using Politifact's numbers, instead of a 24% rating.

I get that by weighting his ratings. I count his Mostly True statements as 80% true, his Half True statements as 50% and his Mostly False statements as 20% true. Then divide that by the total number of statements rated.


(80+74*.8+79*.5+42*.2)/(80+74+79+42+51+4) = 0.566969697


And with that I bow out of the conversation.

Umm, well okay then. We'll leave it at that.

 

[Charles_Main]

I think most of the lies that politicians tell are campaign-related.

And Obama has never stopped campaigning. Whether for Office, or for the Stimulus or ObamaCare. He has told many lies trying to sell us him, and his Agenda.

 

[Billy000]

I think most of the lies that politicians tell are campaign-related.

And Obama has never stopped campaigning. Whether for Office, or for the Stimulus or ObamaCare. He has told many lies trying to sell us him, and his Agenda.

Okay, look at both of the links in my signature and then tell me why you think are still right.

 

[California Girl]

Take a look at Gingrich's record on the truth so far:

PolitiFact | Newt Gingrich's file

More lies than truths, thus far.

Yea, but Gingrich has been around considerably longer than Obama. Can you at least pretend to be rational and logical?

 

[Billy000]

Take a look at Gingrich's record on the truth so far:

PolitiFact | Newt Gingrich's file

More lies than truths, thus far.

Yea, but Gingrich has been around considerably longer than Obama. Can you at least pretend to be rational and logical?

Obviously you can't compare the two. However, you can't deny that, so far, his campaign has mostly been based in falsehood.

 

[Ropey]

Wow. Thanks for the link. I didn't expect Politifact to catch so many of Obama's lies. I've probably noticed some they haven't but kudos to them for acknowledging so many of them.

I think most of the lies that politicians tell are campaign-related.

So that's what you 'think' now, huh?
Obama has never been out of campaign mode with his speeches

Before he made the White House he had written two autobiographies. He's always in campaign mode.

 

[paulitician]

'The Obama Deception.' Watch it and learn. His followers have been duped so badly. Check it out.

 

[Billy000]

'The Obama Deception.' Watch it and learn. His followers have been duped so badly. Check it out.

I'd trust PolitiFact before I'd trust any biased documentary like that.

 

[paulitician]

'The Obama Deception.' Watch it and learn. His followers have been duped so badly. Check it out.

I'd trust PolitiFact before I'd trust any biased documentary like that.

Obama is a mere Corporate Employee just like Bush was. Yea,GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt his "Jobs Czar?" Uh huh,nothing too corrupt or strange about that. GE: Top Ten Military Contractor in the World,Doesn't pay Taxes,and has Outsourced Thousands & Thousands of American Jobs. Yet their guy is Obama's "Jobs Czar?"

Man,this President is right in your face with his corrupt cronyism. I guess he just figures most of his supporters really are too ignorant to know any better. Check out 'The Obama Deception.' You don't even have to believe everything in it. But i bet you will believe some of it. Give it a shot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Again, if we are comparing one politician (Obama), to another politician, Obama has integrity. Has Obama purposefully disorted the truth? Of course he has. He is a politician.

You also must keep in my mind that politicans are not always perfect when it comes to trying to tell the truth. Often times there are simply facts they are missing out on.

And Christ, don't use my youth as an excuse that I don't know what I am talking about. That is such a cop-out.

Sorry. Gotta use your youth. Because that is the only way you get credit for the naive (and false) claim that Obama has integrity and that "Mostly True" and "Half True" are irrelevant in the assessment of someone's veracity.

If you don't understand that Mostly True and Half True are KEY to how liars sell their wares, then you are ignorant.

Youth is an excuse for ignorance. If you continue to believe as you do for the next 10 years, then you will be inexcusably ignorant.


But excusable or not, your current position is ignorant. Plain and simple.

And yet, despite the fact that this older woman is telling me I am wrong, I still remain unconvinced. Why? Because I am basing it off of numbers. You are basing my naiveness on opinion.

And, youre right: half truths are wrong. Mostly truths are not, however.

You remain unconvinced because you are basing your opinion on emotions, not numbers. If you actually based it on numbers you would admit I was right because I am using all the numbers, not just the ones I like.

 

[Billy000]

Me, taking the numbers that actually exist, is partisan

You, dismissing anything that is inconvenient, is totally rational and a great example of critical thinking.

If we were using our critical thinking skils, windbag, we would understand that if we are to examine his mostly false statements, we must also examine his mostly true statements.

No, if we were actually using critical thinking, the first thing we would do is look at the source of the rating. Since that is obviously to difficult for you, I decided to simply assume that the ratings are 100% accurate and simply use them to destroy your argument that Obama is not a liar.

By the way, in order to prove he is a lair all I have to do is prove he lied once. That one statement, being a lie, would negate any argument that he is not a liar, even if you provided documentation that he made 8 billion statements that were completely true. That simply element of critical thinking actually destroyed your argument before you even managed to finish typing it, never mind anyone actually responding to it. In other words, to prove he is not a liar you have to prove that everything he says is true, not just most of it.

The source of the ratings? Yeah, anything that happens to put Obama in positive light obviously means it is biased huh?

So by that logic, everyone on the planet is a liar, huh? Why don't you give it a rest

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If we were using our critical thinking skils, windbag, we would understand that if we are to examine his mostly false statements, we must also examine his mostly true statements.

No, if we were actually using critical thinking, the first thing we would do is look at the source of the rating. Since that is obviously to difficult for you, I decided to simply assume that the ratings are 100% accurate and simply use them to destroy your argument that Obama is not a liar.

By the way, in order to prove he is a lair all I have to do is prove he lied once. That one statement, being a lie, would negate any argument that he is not a liar, even if you provided documentation that he made 8 billion statements that were completely true. That simply element of critical thinking actually destroyed your argument before you even managed to finish typing it, never mind anyone actually responding to it. In other words, to prove he is not a liar you have to prove that everything he says is true, not just most of it.

The source of the ratings? Yeah, anything that happens to put Obama in positive light obviously means it is biased huh?

So by that logic, everyone on the planet is a liar, huh? Why don't you give it a rest

Read the link I provided, you might learn something.


On the other hand, don't bother, you already know everything. The one thing I am glad about is that I am no longer 25, I know I do not have all the answers now.