Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them

Some people will never change.

After all that has happened, does anyone trust Bill Clinton to tell the truth?

I am not knocking Democrats here. I've got no particular bones to pick. I am a Moderate Independent, a registered independent. I've got no party affiliations. One thing I do hate though, is misquoting. Because it is a form of lying that I consider particularly distasteful. What it does is to not just lie, but to say that someone said they didn't. It is not only lying yourself, but bringing in an innocent outsider to make your point.

The Bible calls this "bearing false witness against your neighbor." I believe it is one of the more important of the biblical mandates, having been listed with the eponymous "Ten Commandments." As you may have read in previous posts in this blog, misquoting is something I really am disgusted with. I encounter it quite often with Jehovah's Witnesses. The reason there is that Witnesses are not allowed to read anything not published by the Watchtower organization, so the writers and higher ups are free to quote anyone and everything and make it agree with them. Most of the time, I don't even see why they bother to actually selectively quote or misquote, when they can just as easily write their own material between the quotation marks and call it good.

Again, let me say that I am in no way endorsing any candidate for president in this post. Nor am I endorsing any party.

Bill Clinton in commenting on Barack Obama's war stance got all high and mighty saying that Obama had changed his opinion back in 2004. You should be able to find this from any news source. He was making this speech and getting all heated and uptight saying how the media was sanitizing what was going on. So he says that Obama wasn't sure and quoted the New York Times article. He used this to point out how Obama was wishy washy and all. But the truth is, if you look at the rest of the quote, you will notice that Obama actually said that he wasn't sure, he didn't think the case was made [for the war]. If you ask a jury member why he didn't convict, and he says "I'm not sure, I don't think the case was made for him being guilty, so I voted not guilty," is that wishy washy?

What I am wondering is why did Bill even bother? How obvious is it that he has never even read that article, or, if he did, deliberately misquoted it. C'mon Bill. I want to like you, you did great things for balancing the budget, you shrunk the military, you didn't start any wars, you are a smart guy and a hard worker, but you are a freakin' liar.

So my question is still, do we trust Bill, or has he worn that out? If I were his wife, at what point do I stop trusting him? "Sorry honey, I did fondle that chick, and I'm really sorry, I'll never do it again.......any more..........today." Or is she a wife of priveledge who has long given up asking her husband that he be faithful to her.

I'm not voting for anyone right now.
WiredForStereo