Truth Squad for Obama?

Truth Squad for Obama?

 

The last thing we need is a government "truth squad" for the political process! It should be obvious the dangers that would present even if in the name of a noble cause. Even in this news report the bias is very clear. Even in the first response it is clear. There are misunderstandings, misrepresentations, and outright lies in the political process on all sides. Everyone knows this! People should be smart enough to check things out and not believe everything they hear or read to be the absolute truth. We have to judge for ourselves using the sources we consider credible what is the truth in the claims made. We hope there are independent sources of information to use but all are subject to careful scrutiny. One key for me is that the more one candidate talks about another the less credibility should be given to what they're saying. Candidates have much more credibility when they actually explain their own positions and present their own ideas and plans. Debates, unfortunately, have gravitated away from giving meaningful information to public arguments, put downs, and cute snips. People should be mostly turned off by constant bad-mouthing of the opponent. But maybe we've come to expect it given some of the most popular television shows thrive on this agenda. Regardless, the last thing we need is to add law enforcement - particularly local sheriffs and prosecutors who are elected themselves - into the mix. No thanks! I don't trust the government that much! Think carefully what you ask for!

 

You can not rely upon the government for an equitable "truth squad" in politics. The due process could not possible be conducted in a timely manner nor without tremendous potential for bias. We need to stop looking to the government to make everything right.

 

There's already a means in place to handle defamation through slander or libel. If you believe you've been defamed you can take it to court.

However, be prepared to prove your case. You have to show your reputation was actually harmed. Just being insulted or offended isn't enough. The defamation has to be directed at you specifically and not a group or class to which you belong. The defamation has to have been made with the intent to harm you.

This has to be balanced against the general freedom of speech we have to say what we think about issues and people whether they like it or not or whether it's kind or mean, complementary or critical, or even true or false. Telling a lie isn't necessarily against the law - man's law of course.

I think you can see that the typical political talk - even misrepresentations or lies - wouldn't likely pass these tests. Proving some things true or false could be very difficult. We can't even agree on that on the discussion forum! Besides the case would last well beyond the political situation from which it was spawned.

Getting law enforcement involved as a "truth squad" in our political process would be a tremendous mistake and an invitation to widespread abuse, corruption, and interference in free speech.

There just shouldn't be any question about this among Americans!

 

The words may be believed by some voters but most people doubt most things most candidates say especially about their opponents. Let the people evaluate what's said or not said. We don't need the government to help us with this! This would not be the American way.