Some WaPo pajama boy has spent months documenting Trump's 3,000 "lies" ... see: Washington Post Story. Now there are lies and there are lies ... and it is best to differentiate between these shades of such shading. Below is my way of placing a metric (low to high -- 1) Shading the truth ... 2) Misleading ... 3) Spinning ... 4) Exaggerating ... 5) Accentuating the negative ... 6) Fibbing ... 7)White lying ... 8) Prevaricating ... 9) Lying ... 19) Being mendacious ... 11) Telling whoppers) on such mendacity ... and this author's take on where prominent "liars" lie on this lying spectrum.
My approximate positioning of this group is as follows:
Fox News -- 1.5
Mitch McConnell -- 2.5
Trump -- 4.0
Nancy Pelosi -- 4.5
MSNBC -- 5.0
Main-stream media -- 7.5
Chuck Schumer -- 8.0
Bill Clinton -- 8.5
Barack Obama -- 10,0
CNN -- 10.5
Hillary Clinton -- 11.5
Now, if this isn't taking a stilk to a hornets nest, I don't know what is?
Although I agree with some of your placements, your political stripes are showing too much to be taken seriously . . . but then you weren't serious anyway, right? Axel
ReplyDeleteSeriously flippant ...
Deleteand Hannity is a 0
ReplyDeleteI think you have things upside down ...
DeleteI thought you believed that Hannity spoke 100% truth and 0% lies.
ReplyDeleteThat would make his score 11.0 ...
DeleteBut 11.0 would put him between CNN and Hillary... if you say so!
ReplyDelete