Sure, and if your boss doesn’t care, then you’ll still have a job.
And if you don’t have a single boss but a committee in charge of whether you keep your job, and the committee has to have a vote to fire you, and less than have of them care, then you’ll still have a job.
I, for one, am sure that Trump’s appointee to head up the Truth Police will enforce these new rules in a fair and even-handed manner.
And your boss and the business are not subject to the Constitution and you don’t have a First Amendment right to free speech with respect to your employment (unless you’re some variant of public employee).
Political speech traditionally is at the core of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech (the other being religious speech). If a politician lies on the stump, the voters get to to vote against him. But you don’t charge him with a thought speech crime.
Just like your boss can’t have you sent to jail for lying, a politician who lies is subject to being fired by the bosses. But the bosses can’t send the politician to jail, any more than your boss can send you to jail.
Ohio used to have a law penalizing lying by candidates. The 6th Circuit struck it down.
Perhaps if the media more aggressively fact checked and did not dedicate any time to a “controversy” that doesn’t exist. Just say that Politician-X said “Y” and “Y” is bullshit and here’s why. Nuff said, in other news…
Plus I would love to see realtime fact checking appear behind candidates during debates.
Also, I never understand why politicians don’t sue each other for slander/libel. I get that political speech gets a lot of latitude but so much so that flat out falsehoods aimed to damage someone is still ok? Surely there is a limit even there.
Are you trying to be ironic lying about my positions because I’ve never said Begazhi was a crime. I have said that the actors (ambassador, Sec’y of State and President) acted stupidly and obviously didn’t learn from the Iranian crisis situation. I also never said Hillary should be locked up for her email server but that she was (guess what) stupid about the whole thing. And I am not a “big Trump supporter” but I do agree with him on some things (and disagree with him on others).
Maybe next time make it clearer that you are going for irony unless of course you have proof of all of those accusations.
No I did not. And I don’t think restrictions are a bad thing … or did you buy into the lies the energy companies told about how much it would cost in education spending (it won’t affect it) or how many jobs would be lost (not nearly as much as they claim) or how they cherry-picked the paper that overestimated how much land would not be developable?
And you are aware of course that despite what the energy propaganda machine (CRED aka Coloradans for Responsible Energy Development) claims about respecting local laws the energy companies sued the city of Longmont when they banned fracking. When Longmont lost the lawsuit they paid/bribed the energy companies $3 million to not drill in the city.
Giving energy companies permission to rape our environment just for their own profit is a bad thing.
This is a warning for accusing another poster of lying. That is not permitted in this forum.
[/moderating]
Harry Reid liedabout Mitt Romney taxes “So the word is out that he has not paid any taxes for ten years,” Reid said on the Senate floor in August 2012. “Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn’t.”
"He also said he had no regrets about what he said about Romney. When asked if his methods were reminiscent of McCarthyism, he responded, “They can call it whatever they want. Romney didn’t win did he?”
You’ll note that in my reply I was actually “accusing” the poster of being intentionally ironic in his post. I added the lying part because this is a thread on people lying and not being held accountable for it (which makes not modding HFB but modding me for calling it out even MORE ironic).
In actuality the way I took it was like this.
ME: Gives an example of a politician lying and no one cares.
HFB: I concur. As an example I’ll make up these lies about you (in the spirit of the thread) and no one will care.
ME: OK I’ll play your game. Hey those are lies. Here are my real positions (as evidenced if HFB had looked up my post history as he claimed i.e. easily verifiable.)
Everyone except Bone: …
Bone: Hey you can’t accuse someone of lying. Warning!
Yes I know to take it to ATMB (and I will) but I felt it appropriate in this thread to explain why I posted what I did.
The OP’s proposed law has no chance of a practical implementation. You’re just going to have to rely on the intelligence and integrity of the American voter to discern lies and act accordingly.
Good luck with that.
You are right. I remembered you saying some really poisonous stuff about Obama and Clinton, but going back through your post history with some relevant key terms shows that I am mistaking you for somebody else (damn, I wonder who it was…). I apologize for mixing you up with whoever that was.
All that said, this is a “trigger” issue for me as I have been disgusted about the lying that has been taking place in politics for the last ~15 years and while both sides do it, one side does it a lot more. I took your specific call out of Harry Reid to bee pretty partisan when we have the liar in chief in office currently with a lot more relevant and current examples. For the record I think that Harry Reid’s lies are not good, but the current shit coming out of Republican’s mouths is a lot more problematic and damaging to this country that Harry Reid saying Mitt Romney does not pay taxes. For the record I am not a Democrat and never have been.
Again, my comments to you were based on a faulty memory of your posting, and again, I apologies.
Anyway, I actually have not seen any of the advertising or propaganda or whatever on this issue. The day I got my ballot was the first time I read about the issue even though I had been really curious about all the yard signs. I do not live in an area that is affected by all the drilling though I work in Boulder county currently and my last job was in Longmont and I am aware that it is a huge issue.
When I voted, I went to Ballotpedia.org and read the law, looked at the list of supporters and opponents and read their respective statements, looked at a couple of maps, read the law again, and then voted no. I thought the law went too far (half a mile from any intermittent stream - is there anyplace in Colorado that is more half a mile from an intermittent stream?). I was unhappy with what happened in Longmont and all the stuff that happened up there is the basis of me not really liking Hick. I think we should be able to limit oil extraction and mining in our state. I just think that we can come up with a better law. YMMV.
Not only would the proposed law be impossible to implement (and impossible to fairly enforce if it was), it would also be pretty pointless.
I think we a confusing a cause and effect here. Trumps pathological lying is not the reason our system of government is going to hell in a hand basket, it is a symptom of it.
The system relies as much on unwritten laws, (what the Romans called Mos maiorum) as on written checks and balances. There is not, and shouldn’t be, a written law that says “a presidential candidate shouldn’t constantly and blatantly lie”. That is one of the unspoken things that is taken for granted in the US system. Trump worked out that in this way, as in a whole host of others, there is nothing stopping him from just doing it anyway.
Thats the issue the “mos majorum” has broken down and that’s bad new for the republic. Trumps constant lies are just one symptom of that.
Where did he confess to the lie? I’ve read an interview in which he basically says that he won’t retract any of his words, but that’s not the same as admitting that he intentionally misrepresented something.
Mind you, I do believe his statements were dishonest, and until Trump came on the scene, pretty shocking in terms of disregard for facts. But you said Reid “proudly confessed to the lie,” which I don’t think happened.
Reid’s justification for telling the lie about Romney’s taxes (it was rated as Pants on Fire by Politifact and given four Pinocchios by the Washington Post) was that “Romney didn’t win, did he?”
I don’t know if the attitude of “lying doesn’t matter if it gets you what you want” counts as being proud.
Regards,
Shodan
The problem (besides the free speech one already mentioned) is going to be…who decides what the ‘truth’ is? And who decides who is lying (with or without impunity) and who is just wrong? You are talking about arresting people after all, so how are you going to determine to the degree needed what is or isn’t a lie, let alone what the truth is? You mentioned trickle down economics, and while I think I can confidently say that most economics experts would disagree that it’s a silver bullet to all situations there will be some, at least that could use caveats and special circumstances to give plausible deniability to a politician wrt them lying about it at least. Same goes for most other things.
I’m not sure that it would be a good idea for the government to be empowered to be the gatekeepers of truth or falsehood wrt politicians…I can see a huge area for abuse or slippery slopes. So I don’t think this is something that can easily be solved. The best thing is just for the various media outlets to continue to fact check and to provide data that gives a more nuanced view of what is being discussed and why a politician might be wrong…and let the voters decide on the veracity of the data and on whether the politician in question is lying, wrong or whatever.
OMG don’t apologize. I’ve been building up an argument against my warning for calling you a liar because I didn’t really think you were lying but cleverly making a point and I was playing along. 
So I apologize for calling you a liar since apparently I was mistaken reading your post and what you were trying to point out. Next time you’re in Northern Colorado we’ll buy each other a beer and laugh about it. 
The Harry Reid was not meant to be partisan but it was an example I knew off the top of my head where the politician
Lied
Admitted it
Refused to apologize
The voters didn’t care and re-elected him.
The problem with using Trump as an example is that we need to wait until 2020 to see if the voters hold him to his lies or not. Or maybe after tonight depending on what happens to the worst of the Trumpinistas.
The real problem is that the politicians’ bosses (the voters) don’t hold them accountable. The voters are as divisive as the politicians and rationalize their own party’s lies. I’ll not haggle over who lies more but let’s say I agree with you and there are 30 Republicans and 3 Democrats in Congress that are abject liars and use lies to hurt people (like Lance Armstrong level) or cover up criminality. The problem is not that more Pubs than Dems lying. The problem is all 33 still will win re-election.
We’d have to at least double jail space to house lying politicians, which is all of them.
Media exposure of campaign ad lying and distortion is much more widespread now, sometimes veering into partisan exhortation, but that’s a separate problem.