I'd like to hear folks' thoughts on this:
The biggest taboo in politics today seems to be (for some reason) to call your opponent a liar. Politicians will go to great lengths to say anything but the L-word. You might hear them say, "My opponent...
...misspoke,
...is incorrect,
...is mistaken,
...is clearly confused,
...isn't telling the truth,
...is misleading,
...is making false claims/statements,
...says something that just isn't so/true,
...is using faulty numbers/logic,
...is misrepresenting the facts,
...has taken that remark/statistic out of context
...etc.
Is it time for Barack Obama to call John McCain a "liar?" He'd need an honest-to-God, out-and-out, barefaced lie by McCain's campaign to do it, though; not just an exaggeration or a barely-true statement. He also may want to wait for a better time. But I'm sick of Democrats not hitting back hard when they're getting pounded by Republicans with all sorts of bull****, and I think dropping an "L-bomb" on McCain is the kind of forceful (yet not pettily insulting) rhetoric that could really work. The blogs and the MSM would be all in a dither. It would be front page news. Pundits would debate it nonstop for 48 hours: "Is John McCain a liar?" It wouldn't matter what conclusion they came to: the words "John McCain" and "liar" would have been together in everyone's ears for days on end. And that's a very simple concept for even the most politically obtuse voter to grasp: "McCain = Liar." However, as I say before, Obama would need to specifically reference an out-and-out lie by the McCain campaign that wasn't a half-truth, or a mere misstatement, or a mere lapse of memory. Point to a specific lie as evidence, and levy the charge. The MSM will come up with other corroborating evidence on their own.
Whattaya think?
