The Veiled Chameleon: March 2005: Hypocrisy?

__________ lied!

What do you mean, he lied?

__________ told us things that weren't true!

Well, is it possible that he was just mistaken?

Even if __________ was mistaken, he had an affirmative obligation to know that what he was presenting was factual, so he stills deserves a harsh rebuke! Besides, there's evidence that he lied!

Such as?

Motive! __________'s inaccuracy supported a conclusion that we know he wanted the population to go along with!

That's fairly circumstantial.

There's more! We know that __________ was given evidence that was contrary to his lie, yet he chose to ignore it!

We all receive conflicting information from time to time. We must sort out that which we are to consider to be the most credible from what information we have. Besides, isn't it possible that not __________, but his staff are the ones who were privy to the most contrary evidence?

He is responsible for his staff! And even if you don't accept that he lied, you must at least accept that his motive allowed him to be easily duped!

So, you're saying that behind the lie, or error, was an ulterior motive. So, on its own, apart from the error (or lie), was that ulterior motive justified?

No!

You know this for sure? Or is the jury still out on that one? Would the people of the opposite political bias agree that it wasn't justified?

It wasn't! The jury is not still out on that one! The other side who don't agree are just idiots!