|
Posted on 05/22/2005 3:29:54 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Sandy Berger is caught cramming top-secret intelligence documents down the front of his pants. Dan Rather is caught using forged documents to try to influence a presidential election.
John Kerry slanders a million of his "band of brothers" in bogus testimony before Congress and then continues to lie for the next 30 years, claiming that in 1968 he was sent by Richard Nixon (who wasn’t president yet) to Cambodia on Christmas eve (which never happened), hearing the Vietnamese "sing Christmas carols" (the Vietnamese are Buddhists and don't celebrate Christmas) and being fired upon by the Khmer Rouge (which didn't become a military force until a half decade later).
Howard Dean attempts to spread outrageous lies about President Bush about the events of 9/11, only admitting – after being caught in his dissembling – that he never believed the lies himself. Al Sharpton makes his name by helping to fake the rape of a young child. Ted Kennedy clings to his family name after leaving his "female companion" to drown while he swims to shore to sober up before calling the police.
And Bill Clinton – well, he “never had sex with that woman!”
Al Gore recognizes that if he is going to be of any future relevance, he must join the parade of liars. He quickly reinvents himself by morphing from a quiet, thoughtful policy wonk to a demagogue spewing the anti-American venom and propaganda that has become the coin of the realm in today's Democratic party.
The leadership of the Democratic Party gives a standing ovation to Michael Moore’s fake documentary, which they know to be nothing more than a lie-filled, hate-filled, anti-American propaganda piece. And Ward Churchill's lies not only gain him tenured employment but elevate him to department head at the University of Colorado.
These are not odd zealots but the heart and soul of today's Democratic Party. From its most recent standard bearer to the newly-minted head of the DNC to its leading voices in "civil rights" issues to its top foreign policy advisors to its House and Senate leadership and beyond, lying has become the party’s defining trait, while the few Democrats too decent to lie – the Joe Liebermans and Dick Gephardts, for example – find themselves with less support among the party faithful than did Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat.
It is dificult to take seriously charges that Republicans are "liars" when that accusation is leveled in books like Al Franken's "Lying Liars and the Lying Lies They Tell." After all, how much credence can one given Franken when he had to testify in a court of law – to save himself from a mountain of libel suits – that his book was never intended to be taken seriously? The court agreed that no reasonable person could read "Lying Liars" and think it factual and thus the book was published as a fictional joke book.
So why do Democrats lie? Well, for one thing, they have to. Democrats recognize that the vast majority of the American people reject their basic philosophy – as they did resoundingly in the last presidential and congressional elections – which says that all domestic problems can be solved with forced confiscation and redistribution of income, all social issues can be resolved by more and more government control over the citizenry, and all international questions can be answered by ceding American sovereignty to corrupt foreign powers like France and corrupt organizations like the United Nations.
Further they have to lie because their track record is one of utter failure. The Democrats had 40 years of uninterrupted social experimentation that yielded little to nothing that enhanced our democracy, either domestically or in terms of foreign affairs. Just like the failing regimes of socialist Europe and the failed regime of communist Russia, Democrats cannot point to a single time when leftism – including their own – hasn't brought despair.
After decades of Democrat-driven "affirmative action", "new math" and "multicultural" experiments, blacks are still disproportionately members of an underclass and our schools (unlike those of the past that created "The Greatest Generation") are now so dysfunctional that we have to outsource the simplest jobs to countries like India. Forty years of leftism has left America more divided, not less divided, as the left pursues its agenda of replacing a "melting pot" that worked with a "mosaic" of multiculturalism, multilingualism and America bashing that clearly doesn’t.
These are the tactical reasons that make Democrats lie. Leftists are also liars for philosophical reasons and because, I believe, of psychological aberrations. In the words of former feminist leader Tammy Bruce, leftwing Democrats are "malignant narcissists." In their arrogance, modern liberals believe in nothing greater than themselves and that whatever they say – anything that advances their agenda – must be "the truth."
The flipside of this coin is that they believe that anyone who disagrees with them must be – can only be – stupid or liars or racists. In their self-serving, self-aggrandizing minds, they justify their lies in the name of doing the rest of us a favor, the better to get us to do what they believe is the "right" thing.
Believing in nothing but self doesn't just mean rejecting the obvious higher callings of God, freedom, family and country, but even the smaller things that good people once respected and honored are rejected by today's Democrats.
In times past, a journalist might have had the same ideological bent as a Dan Rather, but his respect for his profession – what they used to call "journalistic integrity" – kept him from being an out and out liar. In the old days, Hollywood's love for the movies compelled them to award the best picture Oscar to what was really the best picture. Today, without regard to the quality of the film, the award is given to any movie that advances the leftists' agenda. This year it was the pro-euthanasia "Million Dollar Baby", in contention with a pro-abortion film and one that touted the work of that known pervert Alfred Kinsey.
In another age, a museum curator placed beauty ahead of personal ideology and thus filled the halls of great museums with exceptional works based on their aesthetic value. Today's "artist" doesn't believe in beauty and thus seeks only to advance their anti-God agenda by filling the space with crosses drenched in urine and pictures of the Virgin Mary smeared in elephant dung.
Democrats lie because, with nothing bigger than themselves to believe in – not God, not country, not democracy, not art, not facts, not history, not freedom – they believe they themselves to be gods, and thus their beliefs become their own “gospel truth." Which is no truth at all!
Evan Sayet is a writer, speaker and pundit in Los Angeles and former Communications Director for LA for President Bush. He has been a TV and movie writer with credits ranging from "Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher" to the cult classic "Win Ben Stein's Money" and the Discovery Channel documentary "The 70's: When Decades Attack." He is currently working on a book: "Regurgitating the Apple: How Modern Liberals `Think.” Evan’s blog is SayetRight.Blogspot.Com
Comments: esayet@socal.rr.com
Ping!
That's one thing about THIS President. He may not be a smooth talker, but you never have to worry what is is.
Bump for later read.
What a great read!
Ain't that the truth.
Great column.
BTW, did anyone watch MTP today? Howard Dean was hilarious.....
Bingo! Thanks.
I agree that W is a straight shooter. It's refreshing. Not a great orator, but one believes him.
Boy, you can say that again. They HATE Joe Lieberman over at DU. Not sure how the author includes Dick Gephardt in the non-lying Democrat category, though.
Ping
marked - too good to let slip away
bump
The Dems are scared to death to be called what they really are ..
Socialists
I was having some trouble with that one also.
"hearing the Vietnamese "sing Christmas carols" (the Vietnamese are Buddhists and don't celebrate Christmas)"
Vietnamese Catholicism was the reason for the war. Catholic missionaries had great success in the 16th and 17th Centuries. The French invaded to protect Catholics in 1847 and remained there.
The South Vietnamese leadership was predominantly Catholic. Cardinal Spellman financed Dr. Dooley's operations there and strongly lobbied President Kennedy for intervention. Dooley's books stirred American Catholic passions.
American Catholics were strongly stirred up by the clergy about the atrocities committed against Catholics and became the strongest support group for entering the war and remaining there.
The Domino Theory was the stated reason but American Catholic furor was the strongest driving force.
Don't know either
Must have missed Gephardt's comment about the President being a miserable failure
So true! Bush does not lie or fake evidence like sKerry does. He is a straight-shooter.
Well done! Thank you for the post!
Didn't the Democratic [North] Vietnamese slaughter thousands upon thousands of Vietnamese Christians, a practice that they continue unto this very day?
i didnt, what did he say?
The Democrats are so far out of the mainstream and know full well the only way to impose their socialist agenda is through the courts.
They fight harder against the president's judicial nominees than they do anything else...it's all they have.
The following books by Dooley, Edge of Tomorrow, The Night They Burned the Mountain and Deliver Us from Evil were major propaganda tools in inflaming the American populace toward action, especially Catholics. Communist attacks on Vietnamese Catholics are documented in these books.
Dooley was a complicated person and there is reason to doubt some of the claims in these books but their role in the late 1950s and past his death in 1961 in preparing Americans for war can not be denied.
Never heard about this? Anyone got a link? I did quick google search but didn't find anything.
"I was having some trouble with that one also."
Evan is a friend of mine, so I'll run this by him. I agree with both of you. Gephardt wasn't exactly telling the truth when he said, "This president is a MISERABLE FAILURE!" He did that, if you recall, when he was frantically attempting to woo some of the hard left Deaniacs to his side, during the Democrat primaries.
If the liberation of FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE in Afghanistan and Iraq makes President Bush "a miserable failure," then I must be Paris Hilton.
Char :)
Great article.I couldn't understand why Leiberman did so poorly with Dem voters.He ran a good campaign,and in my opinion he was easily the most intelligent of the bunch.I assumed the majority of dems were more "moderate" like JL.Apparently i was wrong.
You may also recall that Gephardt was the architect of the late night vote that made the congressional pay raises automatic unless they voted against them. He is one greedy son of a gun. Oh, and there was that little matter of his North Carolina beach home.
Great article; thank you for ping.
pong
Hilarious, yes--when and if Republicans decide to play hardball. Otherwise, dangerous fits him pretty well, too (especially in light of this article).
"The Dems are scared to death to be called what they really are ..
Socialists"
Sometimes I get the feeling that Hannity and Rush want to kick back and call them that. However, for some strange reason I get the feeling that they were told not to.
|
The author needs to put Joe Lieberman back on the list of dem liars. As VP candidate w/Algore, Lieberman dumped ALL of his former beliefs, did a 180 in his desire for power.. an running simultaneously for re-election to the senate. Now, he's trying to reclaim his former beliefs. Wishy washy Joe, did you lie then or now?
Of course, if lies don't work, socialist then use violence intimidation, and other means of force.
So did Zell. That they weren't is why he left. Moderate dems allowed the far left to define them until it was too late. This is why Hillary is scrambling to the right.
Me too.
Good article. I would disagree though that leftists think of their record as one of utter failure. Their goal has always been to destroy the United States economy, military and system of government. They believe that a communist state would be much better.
"i didnt, what did he say?"
Just a bunch of lies and side stepping, typical Nikita Dean. Tim did a pretty good job IMO...he really brought forward all of the stuff that Dean has said aside from his racial remark from earlier this year.
He asked dean why he said he hated republicans, why he said DeLay should go to jail while Osama is innocent until proven guilty, etc.
He did poorly because he was and is a reasonable man. While I may not agree with him on a lot of things, at least he was honest. Just not far enough to the left to suit them.
I think Tim did a pretty good job. He didn't really hammer him, but the stuff he brought up really made Dean look like an ass. I guess he didnt have to because it was apparent that Dean was doing his usual sidestepping.
I worked in a Catholic hospital in my off duty time during my tour in Vietnam. The nuns worked very hard to tend to the sick. They had very little and when we arrived they were so gleeful they were like children. Surgeons operated on crossed eyes, hair lips, and all manner of things that had been left alone. We got in a little trouble for doing it but I am sure there are many adults in Vietnam today that remember Americans fondly. They also ran a school and it seemed to have many children attending.
The author is exaggerating with this one. Kerry never said that. It's too farfetched for most people to believe. Kerry's (and the rest of the Dems') lies are much more subtle.
Kerry said the Vietnamese were "celebrating." Vietnam does not celebrate Christmas. More likely, they were celebrating Tet (Vietnamese New Year) which is observed in February--therein are Kerry's lies exposed. Kerry claims the "Christmas in Vietnam/Cambodia" episode was "seared" into his memory and that Nixon was President at the time--which is a blatant untruth.
With proper fact-checking, we discover that Kerry was indeed lying about the incident, but not as this author suggests. Truth, not exaggeration and faulty reasoning, is the best weapon we have against the lies of the left.
Hardcore dems don't like Lieberman. A liberal friend asked me during the 2004 election, "If you had to vote for a Democrat, which would it be?" I told him Lieberman was the best of the bunch and he said "Well he's just about a f@#((#* Republican anyway."
"... without regard to the quality of the film, the award is given to any movie that advances the leftists' agenda."
And .. the liberals continue to give awards to the worst people, like Dan Rather, et. al. .. only because they are lefties and not because they deserve the award.
i've been listeneing to the interview on drudge, seems that tim russert grew some balls!
I told ya! :D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Nice rant.