Who decides who’s lying? I don’t trust there would be a fair arbiter. I agree with you; I’m fed up with it on both sides, but what about when the media lies? Like the NYT is saying that McCain is smearing Obama on abortion when it appears the ad is actually the truth. They slipped in the word “nuanced”. I think that’s what Obama used to obfuscate his voting record in both the Illinois Senate and US Senate now that the word is starting to get out.
It’s so da&m frustrating!!!
Perjury is lying under oath in a court of law. And I can tell you that no matter what negative things are said, the other side would simply declare the oath violated and both would be in court for every ad they run, whether it is accurate or not.
I understand what you are frustrated at, but when you are a public figure, the legal thresholds for libel, slander, and such are much higher than that of a private citizen.
The Truth is Very Subjective to the Left.
problem becomes who is the arbiter of what is true of false. If you have reporters/partisans who decide what is true or false then the system fails. Take a small example like the Pig With Lipstick ad. Media/Democrats proclaim its a lie, but those who watched Obama said it first time, left with no doubt in their mind who he was referring to
I’d like to see campaigns limited to a month or two at the longest.
The problem with the American election cycle is that everyone has combat fatigue halfway through the primaries. Why can’t we hold all the primaries the same day, have the conventions the next week, give the candidates four weeks to bore us to death and then vote?
That’s a total fantasy, I know, but I can dream...
I’m thinking something along the lines of that old sci-fi movie “Scanners”...make those politicians think twice about
being stuck on stupid!!! ;-)
Sure - Let the “Law Makers” make the rules.
They have one set of rules for “Joe 6 pack” and another for themselves - and guess who always gets away with bold faced lies and such. “Well it ain’t “Joe 6 pack”.