In article ,
says...
In article MPG.1bbb4954d15f76a39896fd@mayonews, Al Spohn wrote:
In article ,
says...
"Dan White" wrote in message
.net...


You were actually right to say that Clinton and Kerry were both transparent
and lie.

Something Bush and Clinton have in common is the way they smirk when
they tell certain lies. When they know that they aren't fooling anyone
but their supporters don't care, that is when they both have this
evil smirk on their face.

When they think they hav eto fool people to get away with lying that
is when they seem absolutely sincere.

Both are a marked contrast to Reagan who apperas absolutely sincere all
the time. Probably Reagan was sincere inasmuch as he always believed
what he was saying, even if he knew it was untrue. That's called
'The Method'.

However, you missed the point by calling people "unobservant
idiots." People don't necessarily miss these transparencies because they
are idiots -- many people don't miss them. They just aren't bothered by
them. They want a democrat in office no matter what, and a little waffling
is accepted as "All politicians do that. What's the big deal?" This
practice is not reserved to the dems, but it seems that way in recent
years.


More to the point voters might prefer a liar over an honest candidate
based on the policies they espouse. I say might, because it may
never come to pass that voters have a choice between an honest and
a dishonest candidate.

Great stuff. I don't think that it's *ever* come to pass that voters had
such a choice, though.

1996 comes to mind immediately. Unfortunately the honest one didn't articulate
(and presumably didn't have) any real explanation of *why* he wanted to be
President, or why anyone should vote for him. And so we got stuck with another
four years of a lying philanderer (or is that a philandering liar) in the
White House.

Nah, if it's Dole you're talking about, his political history was
riddled with creative campaign financing from inappropriate sources. On
top of that, he was Big Tobacco's talking dummy. Nothing that in my
book would rule him out as a viable candidate, mind you, but certainly
enough for me to recognize his measure of honesty where the rubber meets
the road. I'll take somebody willing to lie about their nocturnal cigar
activity over someone who circumvents the rules in campaign financing
and is in the pocket of reprehensible special interest groups any day.

- Al