The political, social networking site that integrates politics with popular culture.
The political, social networking site that integrates politics with popular culture.

Profile photo of James L. Riggs
James L. Riggs @jlriggs57aol-com


I doubt this will be an answer you were looking for, but this is my opinion.

Sadly, I expect politicians to lie, I expect that when they are campaigning, they will make any promise they feel they need to, to get elected. The reality is that they all lie when it comes to getting elected.

I have heard it said a million times that an honest man could never get elected to office and if he did he wouldn’t last long and they’re probably right. More’s the pity.

During the campaign and during most of their term politicians will lie, almost on a continuous basis.

My expectation is that they will keep “none” of their campaign promises. That is for them to answer to. If we could get them to do just one thing during their time in office I would be greatly thankful. Take their oath of office seriously. When they say “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, if they would take that oath to heart and truly “preserve, protect, and defend” it, I would be content with that. Let’s face it, that’s about all we could realistically expect from politicians. If they must lie, then lie about everything else, except that.

Alexander Hamilton, 1794

“If it be asked, What is the most sacred duty and the greatest source of our security in a Republic? The answer would be, An inviolable respect for the Constitution and Laws — the first growing out of the last…. A sacred respect for the constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of a free government.”

Profile photo of Two Cents
Two Cents @twocents

@Politicsinkicks @jlriggs57aol-com I can’t stand it when politicians go back on their promises. They work for us… and to lie to us to get into office, or to not have the bravery to fight the good fight for us, is quite frustrating. I understand politics can be tricky once your at the capitol your basically engaging in a giant chess game with many moving parts, but I appreciate people like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul that have proven principled. They promised to fight against Obamacare, and they did until the last breath. At least we know where we stand with them, we know they are working for us, the people that elected them.

Some of the biggest lies?

Ill start with the most obvious. President Obama campaigned saying “If you like your health care plan you can keep it.” Even politifact has named this the lie of the year. It is completely false.

The NSA spying program… The head of the NSA lied in front of congress saying that the NSA was not spying on all citizens without a warrant or notification. This was a lie.

The IRS scandal: IRS officials said that the targeting of Tea Party groups was simply due to the actions of one office that went rogue while investigations have found that this may have gone all the way up to the President. It certainly went to Louis Lerner.

BENGHAZI: Hilary Clinton, President Obama, and Jay Carney all said that the terrorist attack that killed four Americans was because of protests brought on by a video. This was a lie, they know within minutes of the attack that it was a coordinated terrorist plot.

Ill try to think of more… there are definitely a lot.

Profile photo of James L. Riggs
James L. Riggs @jlriggs57aol-com


Two Cents, like I said it’s sad but true, all politicians lie. However, I will say that this administration has lied pretty much about everything they did do and everything that they didn’t do, and should have.

On top of all of that, they have attacked Our Constitution and Our Bill of Rights almost since day one. Lying from a politician is something I’m used to, maybe not to this extreme, but still I am used to it. But what I can not stand and will not tolerate, is when they attack the one thing that guarantee’s my freedom and the freedom of my children, grandchildren, and so on.

“No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.”

Samuel Adams, 1775

Profile photo of Peter T. Burke
Peter T. Burke @peter-t-burke



Sometime before yesterday when I was a young man I would go to movies with a nice young lady who was the object of my affections for the moment.

We would sit in the back row where the lights were not so annoyingly bright and I would whisper promises that I meant to keep at the time.

It was some time later when I learned that the formal name for the ethical discipline of a back-row Romeo is “situational ethics”.

When I made the promises I had every intention of keeping my promise(s). It wasn’t my fault that the conditions changed before sunset of the next day.

I don’t believe that politicians lie in the vast majority of the cases. In fact, I believe that most politicians are like the back-row Romeo and that like the back-row Romeo, the durability of their promises is directly correlated with their current desires.

A “truth teller” is the direct opposite of a liar but they both have in common that they must know the truth of the matter and agree that truth matters. To be a liar one must know the truth and deliberately say something that is not the truth.

The realm of the Bullshitter lies between the truth-teller at the zenith of ethics and the liar at the nadir.

The realm between the “truth teller” and the liar is filled with bullshitters who are guided by situational ethics. They don’t actually know the truth and just fill the air with bullshit.

When you walk into a grocery store and ask “Do you have any ______?” and the clerk says “We should!” you have just encountered a bullshitter. The clerks response is neither the truth nor a lie. In fact it is just noise that is devoid of meaning or value.

For both the truth-teller and the liar there are only three possibilities; “Yes”, “No”, or “I don’t know” and those responses are mutually exclusive.

For the bullshitter there are thousands of possible responses all of which are decorated with weasel words like should, could, might, maybe, ought, may, etc.
The bullshitter will justify the responses based on the same ethics the back-row Romeo uses – situational ethics.

In my experience politicians don’t commonly make specific, unqualified promises. Politicians qualify their promises to avoid the sort of situation that The Obama has found himself in recently. The Obama made specific unqualified statements about ObamaCare that were not true when made and are not true now and will not be true in the future.
If The Obama knew that his statements were not true when he made them he would be a liar.
If The Obama did not know whether his statements were true or not at the time that he made them, he would be just another bullshitter.

The Obama and his Obamite followers have complied a collection of rationalizations for The Obama’s statements that are uniformly based on the ethics of the situation. By using a blizzard of rationalizations the bullshitter buries his vacuous statements in any convenient reality.

In my point of view The Obama is not a liar but he is a bullshitter. With a liar I could at the least know that there is truth that is being misrepresented by the lies. With a bullshitter there is no means by which to determine the value, if any, of what is being expressed by the bullshitter.

As the situation changes so do the ethics for most politicians.

Here are two works, by people I have respect for, that are related to my response:

“On Bullshit”, Dr. Harry Frankfurt, Princeton University Press

“Bullshitters seek to convey a certain impression of themselves without being concerned about whether anything at all is true. They quietly change the rules governing their end of the conversation so that claims about truth and falsity are irrelevant. Frankfurt concludes that although bullshit can take many innocent forms, excessive indulgence in it can eventually undermine the practitioner’s capacity to tell the truth in a way that lying does not. Liars at least acknowledge that it matters what is true. By virtue of this, Frankfurt writes, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.


“The prevalence of Humbug”, Max Black, Cornell University Press

They are both pretty short but very much to the point.

My favorite example of the application of situational ethics in semantics and pragmatics comes from “Through The Looking Glass” by Lewis Carrol:

Humpty appears in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking-Glass (1872), where he discusses semantics and pragmatics with Alice.

“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ”
“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. “They’ve a temper, some of them—particularly verbs, they’re the proudest—adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs—however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”[21]

This passage was used in Britain by Lord Atkin in his dissenting judgement in the seminal case Liversidge v. Anderson (1942), where he protested about the distortion of a statute by the majority of the House of Lords.[22] It also became a popular citation in United States legal opinions, appearing in 250 judicial decisions in the Westlaw database as of April 19, 2008, including two Supreme Court cases (TVA v. Hill and Zschernig v. Miller).[23]

(copied from Wikipedia –

Profile photo of Coffee Addict
Coffee Addict @coffeeaddict


I had to come back to this topic after the latest video surfaced from a group called Project Veritas.

Apparently, the Democrats don’t think election promises are important at all.

What do you guys think about this? Does it make you as angry as it makes me?

Profile photo of Peter T. Burke
Peter T. Burke @peter-t-burke


I must have missed something in this video. I don’t see that there is anything to be angry about. The video is a compilation of clips of bullshitters talking about why their head bullshitter should bullshit the general public to become an elected bullshitter.

What did I miss?

The bullshitters communication is comprised of words that are convenient to their current reason for making noises.

Modal verbs (can, could, should, might, must, shall, ought, will, would) are the weasel words of the person who is making noises but the sounds are neither the truth nor a lie.

Words that end in “ly” are adverbs (Possibly, maybe, tentatively,etc) and when combined with weasel words “we possibly can …” give sincere quality of solid emptiness to a speaker’s bullshit.

Grimes said she would “support” coal. She never said under what conditions she would “support” coal – and she never said what “support” means to her. Nothing in what she has said indicates how long she would “support” coal. 5 minutes? Until it is no longer politically productive for her?

Her entire statement is just pure, refined, sincere, genuine, unadulterated bullshit.

This is how Americans talk. A listener wades in a sea of bullshit. Listen in your local grocery store, gas station, hardware store, or cafe. Weasel words galore.

I really enjoy political campaigns. It is like listening to 5 year olds describe their skills as monster slayers. They are neither Giants of Truth Telling nor Titans of Lying – just kids letting their imaginations run away with them.

My advice is for you to sit back and enjoy the Clash of the Bullshitters.

If you want truth I have some methods that work for me that I will share with you:

1. Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to.

2. Don’t expect to get water out of an empty bottle. A bullshitter doesn’t know if what they are saying is true or not.

3. A bullshitter will fail when cross-examined carefully. Always ask for the same information several different ways – restate your request and see if the answer changes.

4. The use of weasel words and adverbs to modify the weasel words should be regarded as a bullshit alert. The volume of the alarm should be directly proportional to the number of weasel words and associated adverbs to modify those weasel words.

5. Go out of your way to find and show respect for people who are truth tellers. Truth tellers are not respected in the US and they are hard to hear in the crowd of bullshitters. Your respect for them will benefit you more than it will benefit them.

Bullshitters are unable to tell the difference between the truth and a lie so they treat the truth teller the same as the liar.

Remember – a bullshitter doesn’t have a malicious intent. They just don’t have any real idea if what they say is the truth or not. Most bullshitters a generally kindly people who are just lacking any knowledge of the truth of the matter at hand. They benefit from bullshitting because other bullshitters act on the bullshit they are presented with.

Profile photo of James L. Riggs
James L. Riggs @jlriggs57aol-com


I agree with most of what Peter said, however I think that deception should be set at levels.

Case in point: When obozo was running for president he said he would “Fundamentally Change the Country”. He did not lie about that part. He has done his best to fundamentally change it. What he didn’t say is that his intentions for that change was to socially and economically wreck this country to a point that it could not recover from that change.

Did he tell the truth? Yes, but what he didn’t tell was the awful truth about what he was going to do. What he did was not just hide the truth, he betrayed this country like no other president has done before.

Is the lady in the video lying? Yes. But makes this kind of lie worse than the typical political lies, is the fact she is going to basically do what obozo did she will take the trust that has been given to her, about an issue that is probably the most important issue for Kentucky, then once she is in office she will coldly and callously betray those who put her in office to begin with.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that telling people you are going to fix their roads or build a new capital building and then not doing it is one thing, but telling them you will stand with them and help them to keep thousands upon thousands of jobs, then shove a knife in their backs, is something totally different. To me that is committing treason to the very people who you are supposed to be protecting.

To me she is just another low-life scum, just like obama. Prison should be the next thing on the agenda for both of them.

This is my opinion. Have a great day.

Profile photo of Peter T. Burke
Peter T. Burke @peter-t-burke


OK I tried to participate but Volkalize has wiped out three complete works for some unknown reason. and I an not going to type it all a fourth time

Off to the grocery store

Profile photo of Peter T. Burke
Peter T. Burke @peter-t-burke


Did anybody see my response or is Volkalize doing a Sodahead and simply shutting out some people who are not

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

In order to comment you must: