My background is in public relations.
Depending on who you talk to, this profession can be about truth-telling, presenting the truth in a form that is easier to swallow (sugar-coating), or about out-and-out lies.
The truth can be a nefarious thing, so I’ve always taken the tack that I will tell it to the best of my abilities to perceive it.
The headline above, by the way, is borrowed from Benjamin Disraeli’s quote “Lies, damn lies and statistics”. This kind of stuff was going on even in his day.
To consider a different angle on the truth, science uses the scientific method. Basically it uses a “gradient” to measure facts, ie., observation, hypothesis, deductive-inductive reasoning, testing, proofs, replication and then formulation of theory that may then become a law.
Someone should apply it to global warming.
Speaking of law, that profession also has standards whereby it measures the truth. Portions are similar to science such as deductive and inductive reasoning, but it also offers the concept of reasonable doubt.
Someone should apply the reasonable doubt standard to global warming.
Personally, I think that if reasonable doubt were applied in science, apples would rise to the sky, the earth would be flat and two-dimensional planets would revolve around the earth’s moon like a record on a phonograph. We could all scoop out bits of a marmelade sky, and we could make a sport of shooting the monkeys that fly from the posteriors of liberal “dandy-boys”.
And global warming would become the law of the land (but wait – isn’t that the case?).
And then there is the art of political chicanery that plays havoc on the truth and affects all-the-above. Let’s look as some nefarious examples from current and recent events and trends.
“If it doesn’t fit, you can’t convict.”
“If I did it.”
“He’s in the jailhouse now.”
The Captivating Case of the Dubious Ms. Plame
As recently as 2007 there are lawsuits that seem to refute Valerie Plame’s assertions aimed at George Bush and his administration.
If you have forgotten the case, Plame was an alleged “desk jockey” who made claims that the Bush administration pulled a “King David” and tried to have her husband sent to “the front lines” for having the audacity to raise an eyebrow over the Bush doctrine.
Now there are some strange facts in this case. Plame apparently wrote a memo suggesting that her husband be sent to Niger. Further, the claims are that they were whistle-blowers and yet it appears her sphere of influence was the proliferation of nukes in Iran (doesn’t this sound all-too-familiar to WMD’s in Iraq ?).
In addition to all the above, they have apparently sold their movie rights to Warner Brothers. Looks like anohter Frost-Nixon propaganda piece is about to “explode” onto the silver screen.
It is absolutely fabulous the way Hollywood spin meisters so easily step in and out of reality, and play havoc with the truth.
And yet it appears that in open court, their suits just fall apart.
You can afford the house
ACORN: “Here’s how you go about getting around the system, see. You fill out this form, and that form, you send it through a government agency, and, “voila”, you qualify for a $350,000 home. It’s easy!”.
HOMELESS PERSON: “But how am I going to pay it back” ?
ACORN: “Don’t worry about it. It’s money that America owes itself. It’s the American way”.
and now, for your consideration
Which typical administration seems to constantly be caught up in sex scandals (and I reference Teddy Kennedy, Bill Clinton…ah hell, just throw some spaghetti and see which Democrat it hits), or the admins of Nixon, Ford, Bush, Reagan or Bush?
It is interesting to me that Carter practically ripped the CIA to shreds, that Clinton was known to hate the US military and that the trend of the left seems to continue with Obama stopping the action in Iraq, cozying up to Hamas when their missiles are falling on Israel, and offering “testimonials” to the Arab press. Couple this with hate-mongers of the left trying (unsuccessfully) to drum up a scandal within the CIA (reference Plame, above).
Inductive and deductive reasoning leads me to believe that the case for the truth is stacked heavily against the spin-meisters of the left, and heavily for the likes of Ford, Reagan and the Bush’s.
Where repeatability is concerned in this poli-scientific method, I think all we have to do is sit back and watch the aces fall from the sleeves of team Obama.