Originally posted by gp2112
View Post
You have accepted her lying by saying her lies are not as bad as Trumps. You have accepted by saying that she is a new representative and that her lies to not carry the weight of the lies of another politician. You are stating, in so many words, that her lies are not bad, as long as there is Trump.
Every one in here that is saying her lying is not as bad as Trump is giving her a free pass. Why? Is there a level of unethical behavior that is condoned by all of those who are saying her lies are not as bad? From a NEW representative no less. Would you accept a lie from a professional peer as long as that peer did not have the experience of another peer whom you do not care for?
It is only absurd for those who accept that lying is ok for one, but not ok for another. The absurdity is the hypocrisy that has been exhibited in refusing to make either one lying the equivalent of the other.
She is not a child, and she is a freaking US Representative who has held up Trump to a certain standard, as have you. Yet she is unwilling to even walk the walk herself, and you are willing to forgive her, or minimize you her actions.
All because you do not want to equate her with another liar.
Your actions in defending her, or minimizing her can only be taken as partisan.
It is only absurd to those who do not like being told to look into the mirror. To many of us the absurdity is that after all the crying about Trumps lies, you would temporize her lies with a facile defense of inexperience or that her lies are not as bad as Trumps. To many of us, a lie is a lie, there is no level of culpability, and your defense or temporization can only be seen as a partisan act. If it were not partisan you would not have involved yourself in this thread, or you would have involved yourself in holding her to the same level of accountability of Trump who is another Newb on the political block no matter his exposure or position.
Or you would have called out those who do think a lying politician is not as bad as a lying politician.
Holding one to the same level of accountability is not a partisan act. Nor is it absurd.
I do not need to find other politicians that you find agreeable to make my point. Either a person is a liar, has lied, or they are not and have not. When one allows bias to intrude upon their ethics one is willing to determine degrees of goodness or bad. One lie will lead to another, and another, and if that person, no matter the position, is not held to the same level of accountability we end up with Trump.
You can pass her lies off as "inexperience" or that they are acceptable because she is a lesser politician, but I just see it as a corruption of ethics. No matter the title a person is called.
That others do not see it the same way, to be willing to allow for unethical behavior based up a lack of "experience", is the reason why we have Trumps in office, and politicians that complain about being called out for lying instead of owning their actions.
Hold everyone accountable to the same degree, or you have no room to judge. Ever.
If you do accept certain levels of lying as acceptable, if you try to deny that certain lies are less harmful than others (in a political arena) you are judging from a corrupted ethical position and no amount of semantics will hide that.
You never provided that information that I asked for, nor have you retracted your statement. Please do one or the other.
Comment