DGS49
Diamond Member
As someone with formal legal education, I have spent a lot of time pondering the line between not lying, and actual lying.
To illustrate, former President Clinton famously said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," [Miss Lewinsky]. This specific statement was discussed in advance with Clinton's inner circle, and WJC insisted that being the recipient of a BJ was NOT having sexual relations, which expression is/was limited to the old in & out. His advisors expressed extreme skepticism about whether this non-denial denial would be accepted by the American public*. But at least arguably his statement was not a lie. During other times when he was accused of various nefarious acts or schemes, he would respond, "There is no evidence of that." Again, he was not denying the conduct, just pointing out that there was no publicly-available evidence that he did whatever it was. As with the BJ comment, he was not lying, which I would suggest is, if not ethical, at least ethically defensible.
The country now breathlessly watches the trial of one J. Smollett in Chicago, who, time after time denies that his transaction with the two Africans was not what everybody knows it was. Is it too much to expect the American public will reject and ostracize this lying bastard, or have "we" become so desensitized to prevarication that this will be treated as just someone accused doing what accused people do?
It is clear that few politicians are punished for their public lies, even when they are obviously lying at the moment when they speak. J. Biden (46th President of the United States) claimed on more than one occasion that he had never discussed his son's foreign business activities with that son. Literally Un-Believable. And yet....he gets a pass.
Everyone expects lawyers when acting in their capacity as advocates to lie all the time. We expect sales people to lie.
But shouldn't we demand that Journalists tell the truth? That they not present information in a way that is intended to deceive.? That they not word their stories in such a way that slants reality? And what about "normal people"? Actors, business people, and anyone speaking publicly for any reason.
Lying is evil. People who lie publicly should be shunned.
_________________________________
* Ironically, Clinton's definition of "having sex" was generally accepted at the time when this whole episode was in the news. Having sex is fucking, and other forms of sexual adventurism were sexual, perhaps, but having sex only referred to having sex. It was only later, when the Gay Mafia insisted that oral and anal sex were indeed, "having sex" that Clinton had to decline to defend himself on this basis.
To illustrate, former President Clinton famously said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," [Miss Lewinsky]. This specific statement was discussed in advance with Clinton's inner circle, and WJC insisted that being the recipient of a BJ was NOT having sexual relations, which expression is/was limited to the old in & out. His advisors expressed extreme skepticism about whether this non-denial denial would be accepted by the American public*. But at least arguably his statement was not a lie. During other times when he was accused of various nefarious acts or schemes, he would respond, "There is no evidence of that." Again, he was not denying the conduct, just pointing out that there was no publicly-available evidence that he did whatever it was. As with the BJ comment, he was not lying, which I would suggest is, if not ethical, at least ethically defensible.
The country now breathlessly watches the trial of one J. Smollett in Chicago, who, time after time denies that his transaction with the two Africans was not what everybody knows it was. Is it too much to expect the American public will reject and ostracize this lying bastard, or have "we" become so desensitized to prevarication that this will be treated as just someone accused doing what accused people do?
It is clear that few politicians are punished for their public lies, even when they are obviously lying at the moment when they speak. J. Biden (46th President of the United States) claimed on more than one occasion that he had never discussed his son's foreign business activities with that son. Literally Un-Believable. And yet....he gets a pass.
Everyone expects lawyers when acting in their capacity as advocates to lie all the time. We expect sales people to lie.
But shouldn't we demand that Journalists tell the truth? That they not present information in a way that is intended to deceive.? That they not word their stories in such a way that slants reality? And what about "normal people"? Actors, business people, and anyone speaking publicly for any reason.
Lying is evil. People who lie publicly should be shunned.
_________________________________
* Ironically, Clinton's definition of "having sex" was generally accepted at the time when this whole episode was in the news. Having sex is fucking, and other forms of sexual adventurism were sexual, perhaps, but having sex only referred to having sex. It was only later, when the Gay Mafia insisted that oral and anal sex were indeed, "having sex" that Clinton had to decline to defend himself on this basis.
Personally, there is no doubt that Slick engaged in sex............just ask the dry cleaner. Telling a "LIE" is never "ethically defensible", even a half lie.
If you really define everyone as being equal........why even address gender, or skin color in the first place? Old Sigmund would be the first to point out that behind the "ID" hides the closet BIGOTRY of anyone with such a mindset.
