Arguably, Ron Paul’s “libertarian” advertising is a little insincere, he’s more a fundie neo-Confederate than say, a Bill Maher. But he seems to say what he believes even if everyone around him says he’s a fool.
And I’ve long liked the way Jerry Brown seems to be casually honest, like he can’t be bothered to script some lie.
I would perhaps add Dennis “no strings!” Kucinich, but he’s perhaps more an advocate for his idealistic principles than an exposer of ugly truths.
This is not even close to true. I doubt you’ll find any self-described libertarian anywhere that believes that. Maher is center-left but doesn’t want to call himself that because he’s trying to be edgy and cool.
I’d agree with many names on this list: Ron Paul, Kucinich, Feingold, Simpson, Christie. I’d add Rand Paul and Tom Coburn. To go way back, I’d throw in Mark Hatfield and Paul Wellstone. At one time I’d have put Barney Frank on the list, but no longer.
I’d actually even add Charlie Rangel. There is a man who truly believes his own bullshit.
Hard to say with people like Palin. I’m reasonably sure she believes what she says, but the thing is that she’s never had to pay a political price for it. She was elected in a conservative state, brought into the the campaign as a conservative counterweight to McCain, and then cought the conservative Tea Party wave. So it’s easy for her to say what she believes. The question is what she would do if she stood to gain by portraying herself as something else, and she’s never been tested in this way.
The same goes for a lot of other politicians, to one extent or another.
I agree with many of the names here, and would also add Jesse Ventura. A true fiscal conservative who doesn’t buy into most of the socially conservative bullcrap, and also honest enough to admit when he didn’t know much about a certain issue.
In addition to DeFazio and Hatfield, I nominate Sen. Ron Wyden. The Oregon delegation is always top notch. I think former Sen. Gordon Smith and his successor, Jeff Merkley also deserve consideration.
She regularly waffles on those opinions too. One classic example in fact involves her reactions to both the Muslim community center and the Gabrielle Giffords shooting.
As you remember, she was getting a lot of flack in the aftermath of the shooting (unfairly IMO) for the crosshairs map, the “don’t retreat, reload” remark, and just generally contributing to the decline of political discourse in this country. When she made that (infamous “blood libel”) speech defending herself, one of the points she made was don’t judge large groups of people (ie her and the Tea Party) for the actions of a few crazy individuals. But that’s essentially what she was doing when she said the community center should be moved.
Also don’t forget the shitstorm she raised when Rahm Emmanuel said the word “retard.” But when Rush Limbaugh later used it, she simply brushed it off as satire.
So, yeah, if she was anymore full of shit, you’d need to hook a septic truck hose to her.
I’d like to narrow the field a bit to politicians who are BOTH in-your-face AND no bs. Someone like Palin is as full of shit as someone like Cynthia McKinney, even though both are in-your-face. You can be honest and full of shit at the same time.
Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich both seem like good candidates.
I don’t believe you can be an effective anything if you are in-your-face, no BS and correspondingly, not interested in compromise. I know this is not what the OP asked, but a better question may be “Who is the most effective politician?” The answer is probably the opposite characteristics of in-your-face & no BS.
Politics is not about agreement, it is about disagreeing without killing eachother. Compromise is everything. Absolutism is nothing. Isn’t this how we get our jobs done everyday?
He’s hard to argue with because he never concedes anything, even when he’s wrong. People who think their opinions are facts are hard to argue with but that isn’t a good thing, IMHO. Hard-headed and stubborn does not equate to being a straight-talking true teller to me. His stands against the gold standard have been disproven for a long time now, for instance, but not to hear him tell it.
Right, but the thread is about who the most honest politicians are. Paul isn’t dishonest, he’s just wrong; he genuinely believes in what he’s saying, and he’s willing to piss off his own party consistently because of it.