“Half of writing history is hiding the truth.” — Joss Whedon
THE QUOTE ABOVE HAS MANY APPLICATIONS. One of them is family history.
Much of what one learns of their family’s history requires sorting out the myths and legends that accumulate over the years. Referring to them as “lies” may be too strong; half-truths may be more appropriate, as parents, out of a desire to protect rather than deceive, often keep the whole truth from their children.
After all, does a seven-year-old need to know that a recently deceased uncle committed suicide? Does he need to know the details of a close relative’s divorce? As children mature, the truth is ascertained — yet the half-truths, long forgotten by the parents, linger in the grown minds of the children.
The protective instinct of a father is understandable. Children, after all, may not be ready to accept harsh realities. And a child, being innocent, unquestioningly believes the half-truths heard in youth and makes them his reality. They become cemented in his mind with time, and dislodging them becomes all but impossible.
This principle applies to our friends, the Democrats, just as strongly. They believe in a symbiotic relationship between the protected citizens and the fatherly government — dependent, of course, on their playing the role of provider, protector and divider of the spoils.
Their party leaders recognize the need to keep the whole truth from their children — us — though not so much for their protection as a way to curry votes.
Thus Democratic family stories of self-aggrandizement are ingrained into the children, and woe unto those who dare shine a light on such legends.
Existing on a multitude of levels — from hiding the truth to deception to outright fabrication — such fables serve only those who covet power.
Some examples, both historical and current:
In days gone by, covering up the peccadilloes of those in office was a common media practice; the facts of FDR’s mistress, Lucy Mercer, and Kennedy’s sexual escapades were ignored or actively concealed. This hiding of the truth continued into more current eras, when Bill Clinton was protected as his numerous dalliances went unreported.
Today we see it in a press, as well as politicians, who let things slide that should be investigated: the Ayres-Obama connection, the Obama-Frank Marshall history, the ugliness of Rev. Jeremiah Wright. All were virtually ignored by the mainstream press, Fox News being the glaring exception.
Perhaps the best known deception was FDR’s disability. That his legs were crippled by polio was a fact kept from common knowledge. Certainly, had the public known of his condition, he would have lost votes; those were the circumstances of the day. Keeping his affliction quiet was understandable, yet it was a deception nonetheless.
Another successful deception was the infamous McCarthy hearings, the mere mention of which sends progressives into fits of rage to this day. The focus is always on McCarthy’s tactics and the damage to the reputations of some innocents. But the overlooked fact remains: McCarthy’s premise — that Soviet spies had infested our government — has been proven true.
The infamous “Gulf of Tonkin” incident led directly to escalation of the Vietnam War; with time we learned the truth. That war gave rise to innumerable other fabrications; John Kerry, now secretary of state, presented false testimony before Congress and later was deceptive regarding his meetings with North Vietnamese representatives at the Paris Peace talks.
More recently, John Edwards’s affair while a candidate for the Democratic nomination and later as Kerry’s running mate was covered up until after the 2004 election.
Nor are such deceptions restricted to sexual failings: they continue today in the current administration’s evasions on Fast and Furious; the manipulation of unemployment figures; the obfuscations regarding the drone killings before the House Judiciary Committee; and the president’s misrepresentations of the impact of his programs on the recession. As Michael Boskin of the Wall Street Journal wrote in 2010: “ … his Council of Economic Advisers just estimated the stimulus bill’s effect on GDP at its trough was (only) 1 percent to 2 percent.” Yet regarding claims of reducing unemployment: “On his recent ‘Recovery Tour,’ Mr. Obama boasted, ‘The stimulus bill prevented the unemployment rate from getting up to . . . 15 percent.’ But the president’s own chief economic adviser, Christina Romer, has estimated that the stimulus bill reduced peak unemployment by one percentage point.”
Today we see these deceptions continuing: Benghazi – we do not have answers, the survivors are still hidden, and the false story of an “offensive video” was allowed to linger, encouraged by the president who allows a man to remain jailed because doing so serves his goals.
We are witnessing an increasing divisiveness of the country encouraged by a president who falsely places responsibility for the harmful effects of the “Sequestergeddon” on on the opposition party.
What is disappointing are the number of low-information voters who take pride in the president’s actions, seemingly completely unaware that it is the office of the president that controls the cuts that are implemented.
An illustration of this came from Reuters, which published leaked emails from the Department of Agriculture, including this gem: “Make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.” So we see the cuts that have been made are the most visible (White House tours), the most inconvenient (air traffic controllers) and the most damaging (border guards) — all in hopes that resulting anger will be directed as desired.
Such actions are detrimental to the country. But that is secondary to the goals of the party.
Recently President Obama said, “I’m not a dictator.” It sounded like an affirmation of disappointment rather than a confirmation of constitutional reality.
The lies, the half-truths, the deceptions of the father, ostensibly in the name of “protecting the children,” continue unabated, and are rarely challenged.
But at some future date, as the children grow, the truth of these actions will be understood. We can only hope that by then the damage to the nation won’t be so great that it cannot be undone.
Dennis Lund graduated from California State University-Long Beach with a degree in mechanical engineering in 1981 and has resided in Benicia since 1992.
Sharing is caring!
I’d read Mr. Lund once in awhile he wasn’t so partisan in his observations and opinions…He seems to have conveniently not mentioned here the biggest act of “truth concealment” in a generation, the Watergate Scandal which lead to the impeachment of a Republican presidential lying scumbag…Shame on you for your “preferred” vision always…you wanna be credible, show both sides of all the foul coins…pb
Petr Said: He seems to have conveniently not mentioned here the biggest act of “truth concealment”… the Watergate Scandal which lead to the impeachment of a Republican president
You are right Petr, I was focused on politicians who lied, or were otherwise deceptive and did not pay a political price for their actions, and naturally that limits me to Democrats. If I wanted to right about politicians who paid the price, then Republicans would be mentioned.
Pete, I urge you, and Dennis even more, to carefully read the following 2-part article by Noam Chomsky via the following links, to get a proper grasp of the facts of our national situation. Pugh & Livesay attend also.
Do not beg off with ad-hominem crap about Chomsky not being devoutly addicted to your views.
OKAY, IT’S NEWS TO ME THAT HTTP LINKS CAN’T GET POSTED HERE. WHY NOT?
Shelby stated:I urge you, and Dennis even more, to carefully read the following 2-part article by Noam Chomsky
I have twice now read books you have recommended: “Why We are Liberals” by Eric Alterman and “The Little Blue Book” By George Lakoff, I wrote pieces on both of them.
I offered to you three books to choose from to read that would have given you a perspective which you are indifferent to. You selected not do so. So you will understand my decision to not read the likes of Noam Chomsky (whom btw, I have read on several occasions).
Peter, should I call 911 for your koolaid overdose? Nixon was an amature in the shadow of King Obama’s “TRUTH CONCEALMENT” !!!!The only reason Obama is not sitting it the defendants chair at an impeachment hearing is the romantic relatiionship the MSM has with their god. If any republican would have done even a tenth of what Obama has they would be in a feeding frenzy that would never end. There are hundreds of people DEAD at the hands of OBAMA by selling weapons of war to those that have declared war or jihad against this nation. He has committed treason, much more serious than the proprety crime of Burglary which Nixon did. You worship a false god Peter. Please do what is the required and acceptable response when someone uses your lord and savior’s name in vain, we are all waiting for your mindless programmed response………….Karma
I think I speak for everyone here when I ask, why so angry?
Also, there is no defendant’s chair at an impeachment hearing.
Angry, the MSM fawning over Obama like he is a godlike figure while people are being murdered all around him for mere political purposes. Recently one man….Bob Woodward spoke out honestly…and was targeted immediately by the Chicago machine. Woodward is a big gun…Took down Nixon….And the Obama machine thumbs their nose at him. We should all be worried. Defendants chair is a figure of speech…Although he has in my opinion has committed many felonies that would put any normal person in prison for life or the death penalty.
Death penalty? Are you threatening the president?
Who here agrees with this sentiment/threat? Bob L. ? DDL?
Watching sounds like they are mainlining the Faux News talking points actually believing every word. Bob Woodward is the epitome of mainstream media, but that irony I’m sure is lost on Watching. Dick Cheney should have been charged with war crimes but you just keep on railing about how Obama is the antiChrist. I bet you think he’s really a Kenyan Muslim who secretly wants to socialize the whole country while taking away your guns. Lock the door Bessie, I think he’s coming …
Your so in the lap of obama you’re blind RA…The codified law states the penalty for treason as the Death Penalty, after exercising Due Process of Law that is…Your lord and savior seems to have problems with that pesky little document known as the constitution thought.. I guess his loyal followers are also just as ignorant….
Interesting comment coming from you Peter. You never look at both sides. You are so far to the left you fell off. I believe folks should state their opinions but at the same time show some respect for others and their opinions. Shaming someone when you will not talk about the biggest scandal and truth concealment of all time. President Clinton. Remember he lied under oath and was disbared. I do believe you reme3mber his fingering waving lie on national TV. Not at all very Presidential. Oh I forgot he was Liberal and it was only sex.
As if one head-shot was not enough.
Beat me to it.
You got it wrong Thomas Gunter Petersen. It was to the dress not the head.
I have no idea what that means. Regardless, say hello to Bev.
You know exactly what I mean. By the way BGev is in Montana at our estate.
No I don’t. Likewise, what is a BGev?
“Romney is ready to make the deep rollbacks in health care, education, social services, reproductive rights, that will guarantee poverty, unemployment, overpopulation, disease, rioting; all crucial elements in creating a nightmare zombie wasteland”. – Josh Whedon
Thomas Gunther Petersen AKA Thomas Petersen AKA enviroonmentalpro. Romney is not President.
Mr. Livslay, You are right. And, It is a good thing, as well. Try to relax a bit. Say hello to the grand kids. What were their names again?
No, Romney isn’t president, but you voted for him. Romney took every possible position on every issue (excluding, of course, his view that the wealthiest people in this country aren’t wealthy enough), so you can decide when he was/wasn’t lying, but he lied more than any other candidate for president ever. So, clearly, you have no issue with a liar.
Benician please explain in detail all of Romneys loes. That could be good but in your case impossible. Go back to your trailer park BBQ
Livesay, you’re dumber than we’re already aware if you don’t think Romney took multiple stances on dozens of issues. If he was telling the truth on one side, he was lying on the other. Look ’em up, yourself.
As to who resides in a trailer park, I’m guessing it’s the guy who can’t spell to save his life.
Oh, how quickly we forget the sins of the right. All that talk about mushroom clouds and weapons of mass destruction while ignoring the intelligence that Osama bin Laden was all but sending engraved invitations to his treachery. While sad, Benghazi only resulted in 4 deaths. What about the almost 10,000 that have been killed or committed suicide since Iraq and Afghanistan. And as for “low information voters” haaaaaaaa, seriously? You don’t get any lower with information than the Fox watching trolls who live in “the bubble.”
A few people murdered for political gain is an acceptable thing PA? You are an evil creature!!!
No, Watching, I think Dick Cheney and W are the truly evil creatures for lying about nonexistent WMDs so that over 4,000 of our brave soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians were killed.
Your boy obama and his minions gave thousands of weapons ot Mexiccan drug dealers that were used to murder US Federal agents, Mexican men, WOMAN AND CHILDREN. Of course he his really into killing children as he is a PROPONENT of late term abortion as are his fellow communist leaders. RA, you also have to acknowledge his Muslim background has to come into play also, seems those weapons he is giving to his Muslim Brotherhood brothers of his that his that he has befriended are in fact terrorists. Are you a terrorist supporter PA, do you think it is a good thing to murder those that do not believe in Islam?
There are lies and there are LIES, from both parties…(and, if you wanna cite lies to cover up affairs, you’re really wasting our time), but there has been no lie bigger, nor more damaging to both our country and our image abroad than the lies the Bush administration shoved down our throat to gin up the war in Iraq. The cost of lives and dollars is staggering and dwarfs anything any other party/administration has ever done.
Benician
So, it is all George Bush’s fault then?
You conveniently forget that Bill Clinton agreed and supported George Bush on this issue, as did most Democrats, who then abandoned ship, so to speak, as soon as things went south.
Cowards and hypocrites.
Dick Cheney: “THere is NO DOUBT Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction; there is NO DOUBT that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.”
Truth or Lie?
Actually, there are too many to enumerate on my own. Read them for yourself:
http://www.iraqwar.org/adminlies.htm
How many Americans died? How many were wounded? How many are suffering from PTSD? How much did it cost the US? And, how much richer are Bush and Cheney as a result?
If you still defend them, congrats…you’ll rot in hell with them.
You continue to be a hypocrite, your lord and savior can MURDER people and it is ok, but Bush and his clan does and it is a real bad thing….
You’re right, the Democrats were cowards. But they knew if they opposed the Iraq war then people like you and the conservative media (Fox News) would label them unpatriotic and even treasonous.
To Mark:
And we would have been right.
No, Dennis. Not all Georgie’s fault. Fault flowed from Cheney and his merry band of sooth-saying Neocons. Iraq would be a cake-walk, Iraqis would welcome our G.I.s with cheers.
Please Benician, you are late to the party. But again go ahead and explain the lies in detail. You will not nor can you. Go check that Safeway cart BBQ at the trailer park. You do not want to be late.
That’s right…there WERE WMD! That’s right, Hussein WAS involved with 9/11! The Cheney/Bush team was intent on invading Iraq the minute they took office, and 9/11 gave them the excuse they needed. BTW, you do realize, of course, it WAS Bush/Cheney in charge when 9/11 occurred, correct?
All because of President Clinton. Yes there was WMD and everyone new it, includling yourself. Benician I do not know where you have been for over 30 years, But if you do not know how can anyone help you? But is does appear not in the good ole USA.
Keep showing your ignorance, Boobie. No WMD’s. If you argue otherwise, you confirm every negative thing said about you on these boards. You know…things like ‘liar’, ‘ignoramus’, ‘idiot’, ‘fool’. Get the picture?
Benician you should read the post by DDL below. Then we shall see who all the names fit.
Benician stated:No WMD’s. If you argue otherwise…
No MWD’s in Iraq? Explain away this one:
Massacre at HALABJA Shows Evil of Hussein’s Rule
President George W. Bush listens to Dr. Katrin Michael, at right, Della Jaff and Idres Hawarry, foreground, in the Oval Office Friday, March 14, 2003. The three are from the Kurdish area of Iraq where a chemical weapons attack killed 5,000 citizens 15 years ago this weekend. Thousands died in the days following the attack on Halabja and an estimated 10,000 people still suffer from the attack. Idres Hawarry survived the attack on Halabja, Dr. Michael survived a similar attack in another Kurdish village and friends and family of Della Jaff were killed in Halabja. White House photo by Eric Draper.
source
To continue to try and justify the Iraq war is dishonest and shameful.
Nice deflection Mark, but your comment fails to address the question asked.
Benician has categorically stated that there were no MWD’s in Iraq and (separately)that Bush/Cheney lied on that subject (i.e. that they knew there were no MWD’s but deceived everyone in to believing in their existence). Both of those statements are false and are a part of the pack of lies the children have been fed, fueled by an abject hatred on the part of the left for Bush/Cheney.
Justification of the War opens up the discussion to a myriad of other issues, and serves to sidetrack the fact that Benician made statements which were wrong, and then insulted Bob Livesay in so doing.
She owes Mr. Livesay an apology, but Hell will freeze over before that occurs.
Like Boobie, you’re an idiotic, ignorant fool. Even Bush admitted no WMD’s were found (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soohikNdbWs). Even Faux News admitted no WMD’s were found. Karl Rove admitted the claim was only a ruse to sell the war. If you’re this averse to the truth, you really ought to find a new hobby. You’re out of your league here.
The insults that you throw out so casually are more correctly addressed back at you, as you are avoiding answering my question regarding the use of MWD’s prior to the war.
You make the connection, that because no MWD’s existed after the war, then no MWD’s ever existed. By making this error you are then judging the actions of Bush/Cheney based on information gained as a result of the war. You also ignore the facts that:
1) MWD’s existed before the war, we know this because they were used to slaughter thousands of women and children, people you are willing to overlook. ‘They are just Kurds’ seems to be the attitude reflected by your callousness.
2) UN inspectors admitted they did not find all of the WMD’s (Scott Ritter put the number at 90-95% found and destroyed).
3) Hussein was purposefully deceiving the world into believing he still had such weapons.
4) The only reason we now know that WMD’s have been eliminated is because we went in and eliminated Hussein.
5) If we had not gone in, then Hussein would have remained in power, people would have continued to be killed and young girls would have continued being raped by Hussein’s boys and likely by others as well.
So while you condemn the war, you have to be willing to live with what would have happened had the war not occurred. How many more people would you have been willing to allow to be slaughtered and raped?
To Editor:
Last week you deleted one of my comments that was very similar to DDL’s above: “How many more people would you have been willing to allow to be slaughtered and raped?”.
I’d ask that you consider exercising some consistency here.
Consistency is what we strive for. The two comments are not comparable, except in the use of a certain four-letter word. The word itself was never the issue. Ed.
Yes, the comments are comparable. I sorry you can’t see that. “The word itself was never the issue.” Please explain. “Consistency is what we strive for.” – Strive a little harder.
I’m sorry you can’t see that they aren’t. We strive very hard — and I’m sorry you can’t appreciate that. Ed.
Thanks. At this point I can only recognize your unwillingness to point out the difference. No doubt, it is due to the fact that you are unable to. Keep up the great work.
At this point, recognizing your unwillingness to drop it, I’ll ask you to post your original comment from the other thread (I didn’t keep it after deleting it) so everyone can judge for themselves. Kindly include the context in which the comment was made. The difference, I believe, will be quite clear to all. Ed.
No problem. Not recalling the wording exactly, the context was as follows:
The original commenter made reference to a Russian friend of his that was apparently a soldier at Stalingrad. The commenter seemed to justified only apathy on the part of his friend as a result of hearing the screams of German soldiers being burned to death during the battle. I requested that the commenter ask his friend whether he was aware of Russian soldiers moving westward during the closing stages of the war and committing unspeakable acts against young German girls (a well documented historical fact). My goal was to determine if the same level of apathy should be applied.
DDL’s comment seems to be implying that Benician is a proponent of rape and murder.
Thomas, is it acceptable for Obama and his minions to murder people in your book? Should those that REFUSE TO SEE THE TRUTH be allowed to post their opinions but other opinions must be censored?
Apropos of nothing.
Blind and faithful worshipper of your lord and savior obama…..
Again, apropos of nothing.
Oh, so we went in for humanitarian purposes? I don’t recall that being the story sold to the country. Do you? If that were the selling point, would we have gone in? The admin sold us a lie. When the lie was revealed, they changed the justification, hoping simpleton lapdogs like you and Boobie would buy it.
UN weapons inspector Hans Blix found no WMD’s. We knew there were no WMD’s. It was Bush who forced Blix to leave before he was 100% done. We knew there were no WMD’s. But, we knew they could sell a war.
Hussein was a mostly-toothless dictator after the Gulf War. As a result of the last Iraq war, Iran dominates the Middle East. Is that the result you were looking for?
Why was the war not paid for? What do you think of the first-ever tax cuts while our nation was at war? Does anyone supporting the war and the tax cuts have a right to complain about deficits?
Benician stated: Oh, so we went in for humanitarian purposes? I don’t recall that being the story sold to the country. Do you?
As a matter of fact I do. In the War resolution of 2002, presented and approved by Democrats, humanitarian reasons was one of the dozen (or so) reasons given.
Gosh, for being the simpleton lap dog I am, I sure seem to know more about this then you do.
One of a DOZEN. To you ever speak in anything other than GOP talking points? You’re being disingenuous (look it up) if you try to suggest the war was sold to the public for reasons other than WMD. So, I’ll repeat the question because, as a simpleton, you seem to have trouble digesting….if the war was sold to the public as being for humanitarian purposes…not for WMD…would we have gone? We both know the answer.
Also, should we expect your next column to push us toward war in Sudan, Uganda and the dozens of other nations where people are slaughtered and raped?
Benicians o you care about himan right? I thik you do. sSo is going to be the protector of human rights. Germany, France, Russia or even China. I do believe if we believe in human rights we must do every thing possible to achieve thar goal. War is not always the answer but in some cases the only solution. I would like to know how America should participate in these issues if at all. In the past we have been isolationist. Is that the answer? I think your answer might help me to understand your feelings.
sorry for the typos
Benician: One of a DOZEN. To you ever speak in anything other than GOP talking points?
Your lack of comprension is stunning.
I stated:
In the War resolution of 2002, presented and approved by Democrats,
My comment was based on the actual wording that was approved by both Houses of Congress by a 363 to 176 vote. About 115 of those 363 votes were Democrats.
As well as: So, I’ll repeat the question because,<P
Sorry, until you answer the question I asked of you, I will not bother to answer your direct questions. You have been asked twicw and each time you fail to respond.
Benician I think it would be nice if you answered by post below. Thanks
What tax cuts? Are you so silly to say that the fiscal cliff tax cuts were good for the middle class. Sorry Benicia you are out of touch on taxes. Just look at the 2 % payroll tax that was restored and is destroying the middle class. Get your act under control. You know nothing about taxes. Please explain where the middle class had a gain. If you new anything you would understand that the S/S payroll tax restored increase is just a part of a well funded benefit that has no burden at present on the budget. Remember Benician S/S is a funded benefit by the employer and the employees. It does not cost the tax payer one cent. It is funded for at least 20 years. Just stop it, you are unaware. Answer my question that I posed below. You can not answer that very humane question of your beliefs. You are impossible to understand.
Certainly what is clear from the examples Dennis cites is the double-standard that we are even now treated to when it comes to how the mainstream media covers government policy and actions. What is disturbing is the failure of party leaders to challenge the prevailing wisdom and ideology coming from the administration. The choice of Hagel and Kerry should be deeply troubling even to Democrats. Were no more qualified candidates interested – or were they simply not asked? Either explanation ought to raise eyebrows somewhere, shouldn’t it? We seem to have gone from “speaking truth to power” to silence (and its handmaiden – blaming others or telling folks it isn’t as bad as what Bush did so we shouldn’t care).
Thomas Peterson said: DDL seems to be implying that Benician is a proponent of rape and murder.
Proponent of?
That is a far cry from “indifference to” which would be the correct interpretation of what I stated. How you took my comment to mean she was actively in support of such atrocities is a clear indication of an ability to read something into what was said which was clearly not intended.
“There are only two things in the world: nothing and semantics.”
― Werner Erhard
Apropos of nothing.
Much like your first comment.