Bearing false witness... Not a crime? Or is it?

Still kicking your dog, are you?
Justices hear state arguments to outlaw candidate lies about opponents

SEAN COCKERHAM; The News Tribune
Published: June 30th, 2006 01:00 AM


Outlawing lying by politicians might seem as futile as making it illegal for the Mariners to blow a lead.
But the state is still trying to do it, despite several court rulings supporting the right of political deceit.

The state’s lawyers tried to convince the Washington Supreme Court on Thursday that political candidates shouldn’t be able to get away with making stuff up about their opponents.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/government/story/5891267p-5216555c.html

And as the american people are the losers from these deceptions.

We need some ability to establish a public "truth" or we're screwed,
and new media are undermining the social record by establishing
dissonant deceptions under the auspices of a postmodern santa clause
truth, or a real deconstruction of slandering people as a way of
destroying their reputations, a human rights violation that be.

Bush lied about maccain, he lied about the war, and he lies about
everything, and noboody, even in retrospect is accountable. How
shocking, that not a soul can stand up and say that they were at
least responsible. But swiftboating is like media lynching and
i think it should be a serious crime, as it does serious injury to
persons and keeps good people from public life.

Speech should be protected, whether true or not. There are already protections in place to prosecute speech that rises to the level of slander or libel.

Who determines truth? You can bet that the bush team absolutely believes that they told truth about WMD and Saddam..

The last thing we need is to continue to hack away at the 1st Amendment.

Postulate a public broadcaster, a real one, that is chartered
by the congress in educating the public to common truths.

This would not impinge upon any private freedom of speech, but
merely establish some forum for analysis and discussion where
it all comes together, and conservatives and democrats are
sitting in the same room with free speech and open questions.

A public broadcaster that anually held a show, the 100 most powerful
persons in america, where a roundtable committee of experts argues
and airs their reasons for selecting.. a broadcaster who's job it
would be to actually inform.

Liabel law is not working, it is only for the rich, and then you've
created a system where only the rich have access to liabel protections.
Then campaigns are more plutocratic.

Either make it mandatory to vote in a democracy (an impingement i'm
willing to live with), or do something where equal free speech
can find an open consenus, or a disagreement, but one where
the forum is not skewed by tabloid yellow shit... it is rotting
away the basis of government by supporting idiocy as intellectual,
as if ann coulter was but a hack trash talking for a buck.

:rofl:

Bearing false witness? Despite the four-square condemnation in Scripture and despite the GOP's professions of piety, we all know the real answer--It's OK as long as you are Republican or better yet, a Republican "conservative."

:grr: :grr: :grr:

in advertising? Or bait and switch? Candidates are putting out a "product", themselves, for people to choose over another product, the other candidate.

I'm all for free speech, but you still can't yell fire in a building when there isn't one.

untrue. I think it will happen. Cause democracy is going down the tubes.

Reversing that would be a mistake.