I don't listen to Beck. I don't subscribe to his program. I rarely visit his site. I saw his old show a few times. However, someone posted this link on Facebook and I listened. If you have 12 minutes listen to it. He quotes President Obama and then asks if the President told the truth.

This video, if watched by every American, would ensure his defeat. It shows how "Hope and Change" became "Lie and Obfuscate."

I listened to this. I wish I could get those 12 minutes back.

Yes, Beck is very good at what he does, and he has the power to reach people in a way few of us do, but much of what he says here is crap. Obama set goals and he told people what those goals were. For example, close Gitmo in a year, but it turns out he can't close Gitmo because there are still people there and he doesn't have anywhere else to put them. It's been awful, distasteful, and, I would argue a goal that's led our nation into the evil business of assassination (because if you don't capture them, they don't need to go to Gitmo.) So call it a failure of leadership. Call it misplaced priorities for not getting it done. But calling it "lying" is just dumb and pandering to people who don't understand complex situations.

Geojanes, I understand that you do not agree with the fact that GTMO should be closed. Fact is Obama said that it would be closed in a year. It has been a year (or 3) and it is still not closed. That does make this a lie. Reasons not withstanding, but a lie just the same.

Remember when Bush 41 said "Read my lips, No new taxes"? Then he raised them! He had his reasons, but the fact is that the statement is false.

Both men lied. We are judged by the words we use, and the reasons we have for our actions.

But to call this anything but lying is deluding one's self.

Neither were lies. Both were broken promises. It's not tough to work out the difference...

I will not raise taxes. I then raise taxes. That is not a lie?

If my 4 year old says I will not get a cookie before dinner, and then I see her with a cookie before before dinner; that is not a lie?

I disagree. What do you consider the difference?

danivon wrote:Neither were lies. Both were broken promises. It's not tough to work out the difference...

If one acknowledges that he/she was wrong, then I'd agree. Please point to President Obama acknowledging he was incorrect when he predicted/forecast closing Guantanamo, reducing the deficit by half, reforming our immigration policy in the first year, etc.

Geojanes called these "complex" situations. A few of them aren't complex at all.

For example, did President Obama introduced a comprehensive immigration bill in his first year?

Did President Obama introduce a single budget that would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term?

Those are just two. They're not "complex." He just lied.

bbauska wrote:I will not raise taxes. I then raise taxes. That is not a lie?

If my 4 year old says I will not get a cookie before dinner, and then I see her with a cookie before before dinner; that is not a lie?

I disagree. What do you consider the difference?

It's about intent, the direction of time and that there's a difference between promising to do something and failing, and promising not to do something but doing it anyway.

I'm not saying that breaking a campaign promise is a good thing, but it does not necessarily make one a liar at the time of making the promise if later you break it.

danivon wrote:I'm not saying that breaking a campaign promise is a good thing, but it does not necessarily make one a liar at the time of making the promise if later you break it.

Does he have no obligation to explain why he broke the promise?

Btw, Gitmo was not just a "campaign promise." It was something he promised with great fanfare after being inaugurated. He actually signed an executive order to put an exclamation point on it.

Depends what you mean by 'obligation'. It's clear enough why Gitmo wasn't emptied of prisoners, and that was not all under Obama's control.

I believe I made my position clear on campaign promises a while ago when ARJ was arguing they could be ignored by 'pragmatic' politicians.

danivon wrote:Depends what you mean by 'obligation'. It's clear enough why Gitmo wasn't emptied of prisoners, and that was not all under Obama's control.

I believe I made my position clear on campaign promises a while ago when ARJ was arguing they could be ignored by 'pragmatic' politicians.

^worthy of Jay Carney or Bill Clinton.

(sigh)

The budget situation?

You can sigh all you want but you half-answered one part. That's a Carney special.

I speak for Obama now? I already made my position clear on campaign promises.

You should see me. I look great! I have six-pack abs, muscles on muscles, and dashingly good looks. At least I have always intended on dieting, getting plastic surgery and working out.

Intent is all said and good, but it does not solve the problem.