How Can You Laugh at a Time Like This? is a Dream Machine Site The Dream Machine --- The Imagination of the World Wide Web

We aren't sure what Sir Walter Scott was referring to in this quote, but it is often used to sum up the perils of lying. If you are like us, your parents taught you at an early age that you should NEVER lie. As we grew older, we realized that what they meant was never lie to THEM. It isn't hard to imagine situations where it not only all right to lie, but absolutely essential (think: Anne Frank). We did learn, however, that lying as seldom as possible makes it much easier to get away with lying when you resort to it.

Scott was probably referring to just one aspect of fabrication. That is, when you construct a false story and you are questioned or challenged about it, you must then elaborate your lie and, if you are subsequently questioned about your elaboration, you must further embellish. A tangled web indeed!

In politics, our thoughts about lying were creatively stimulated recently, first by the Lyin' King, Bill Clinton, and currently by Representative Condit's little fibs about whether and when he was boinking the missing intern. Since we ultimately judge elected officials, this forced us to re-evaluate our personal notions about lying. When is it OK for a politician to lie and about what? It seems that we decided that prevaricating about blow jobs is OK, about missing interns is not.

If you think about lying much, you quickly realize that as a philosophical issue it is extremely complex. Even in law, where those who testify swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, what constitutes perjury...a crime in and of itself...is unclear. Lies not pertinent to the testimony are exempted, for example, which was Clinton's...successful...defense.

So, today, we examine only that aspect of political lying which involves elected officials lying to their constituents. As is obvious from watching any Sunday talk show, politicians have evolved an elaborate system of doubletalk to avoid giving clear answers and, more importantly, to escape the possibility of being caught in a bald-faced lie. One technique is to answer a different question than the one that was asked. Another is to pretend not to understand the question, asking for clarification after clarification as a way of using up time and...it is presumed...the viewer's attention. A third way is simply to make your answer so long and complex that it is impossible for any reasonable person to divine what it was you actually said.

We believe that this political "culture of prevarication" is coming to an end. Events such as the election of Governor Jesse Ventura make it clear that people...at least the people in Minnesota...are growing tired of the this political game. "He is honest" was the most frequently cited reason of people who voted for him. Thus, even though he is and was a political novice...he admitted that himself...and he frequently sticks his foot firmly into his mouth, he still enjoys the highest approval rating of any Minnesota governor in history.

John McCain tried valiantly to imitate Ventura, but in the end was incapable of escaping his years of "training" in the congress as a major league bullshitter. The tangled web of deceit he had woven over the years was just too complex to navigate in the heat of an election campaign.

Government officials are not the only promoters of nonsense, however. Movements, such as the contending "right to life" and "pro-choice" operations, routinely exaggerate both their opponents' faults and their own virtues. The opposing voices in the global warming controversy, the War on Drugs, the anti-smoking fanatics all routinely invoke junk-science to "prove" their contentions. Then there is organized religion. The very first lie told by a human being was probably "there is/are god(s) " or "you're not really going to die." Wannabe priests were probably motivated by a vision...the vision of others in their clan providing them with food and other necessities.

As you probably know, we are great promoters of democracy...the more the better. In this Information Age of the Internet, we are also strong defenders of this medium, believing it to be the pathway to civilized maturity for the peoples of the world. Still, it is becoming increasingly obvious that in order for the people of the world to actually govern themselves...the promise of America, the goal of democracy...they MUST have accurate and truthful data. We all know how annoying and embarrassing it is to be taken in by some charlatan peddling poppycock. The Internet is FILLED with such nonsense, both on Web pages and in the reams of spam we delete each day, proving that a market for balderdash still exists. But it is shrinking. Because of the nature of the Web...any document can be "updated" at any time...truth is gradually replacing falsehood, accurate data replacing errant malarkey.

So it must be with politics. As young persons are gradually replacing the dinosaurs of deceit, they bring with them the newfound reverence for the truth. Here are some suggestions to help accelerate this trend.

• Talk show hosts should institute a policy that every guest must answer every question at first with a simple "yes," "no" or "I don't know." Once that hurdle has been surmounted, they can then continue on with their justifications and elaborations. However, one of those three MUST be the first words out of their mouths. Failure to observe this rule would result in a technician killing their microphones. Any talk show producers out there with balls enough to do this?
  
• A Web site should be established...perhaps called "Liar, liar!"...on which known lies and obfuscations are posted daily. This would include anybody with a political agenda, including so-called "scientists" and "theologians." We would do it ourselves, but we lack the resources...not to mention the time...to do a good job of it. Anybody from Fox or CNN listening?
  
• Most importantly, we the voters must cast our ballots for those we perceive to be most honest among the various candidates, IRRESPECTIVE of political party. After all, does anybody really think there really is a dime's worth of difference between the Poobs and Demis? Third party candidates will generally be less influenced by the historical culture of prevarication, so they would be our first choice. But, one must be careful here as well. As you may remember, we took Harry Browne...the Libertarian Party candidate...to task for HIS whoppers, which we found to be even sillier than those of the major candidates. The previous two suggestions, if implemented, would provide us with the ammunition we need to tell Tweedle Dee from Tweedle Dum.
  

Talk to you later...

If you buy them from here, we get a kickback!

---

---

Would you like to "subscribe" to a text only version of this column? Just click HERE and fill out the form you find there and each new column will be delivered to you via email on Moday morning.

---

---

If you would like to recommend this column to some friends, click HERE and fill in their email addresses in the form you will find there, along with your comments.

---

To contact Willy or Gypsy and comment on what they have written...or anything else...write to willy@dreamagic.com or gypsy@dreamagic.com.

---

...the best independent ISP in the Twin Cities

---

Back to the table of contents.

---

The Dream Machine --- Network Services

---

---

A newspaper near you.

---