Blumenthal’s Damage Control Bungle

I’m still waiting for her campaign adviser, Bautista, to go to the Blumenthal camp and give him a piledriver.

Batista (should know my rasslin’names by now )

Blumenthal did not misspeak, he lied.
.
There is a big difference. When you positively know something is not true and then you say it anyway, it is a lie.
.
He used this lie many times in the past because he felt it helped him politically. When Newspapers printed this lie many times over his political carrier, he never corrected them. Not even once.
.
He makes his lack of apology speech at a “Veterans of Foreign Wars” hall, a place he is excluded from being a member because he never actually fought in a foreign war.
.
Is this the type of leader that should be sent to Washington at a time with the public holds congress at a 22% approval rating?
.
Get real

The available evidence susggests that you are mistaken. He has correctly described his service on multiple occasions.

Of course, when you choose to ignore anything that doesn’t support your particular worldview, then you are free to believe anything you choose.

He didn’t lie about being in the military. He meant to say he served in the Vietnam ERA, not the Vietnam war. Where he went wrong is to not clarify that. We know he was nowhere near combat. (Not clear if he deferred like a certain VP). Why he would need to throw people off like that, particularly when serving in the military has diminished impact on one’s resume, is puzzling.
.
Congress may have a low approval rating, but I doubt that your *Congressman* does.

I thought McMahon DID win the Republican nomination at this weekend’s Statewide Republican Convention in Connecticut?
.
One thing voters do not like, and that is someone who is caught in an outright lie. This will be difficult not only for voters in Connecticut to trust, one of our most basic and first learned traits.
.
Now the question going forward, how will Connecticut voters trust or mis-trust Blumenthal. Can they or will they forget this major identification of Blumenthal’s character when they go to the polls to vote?

P&N
.
Support your man right or wrong only shows you to be ideologues rather than reasonable people.

“This is Damage Control 101. (Think Toyota.) Don’t draw things out. Admit fault. Move on. Blumenthal, it seems, is finally getting the memo.”

I know. Politicians always mess up on this, and reporters never fail to point it out. Time for a few reporters to run for office.

If the Democrats do not find another candidate they will lose in Connecticut in November.
.
When you can show a video of a candidate in a commercial lying over and over again and show multiple Newspaper articles stating the lie and the fact that he or his staff never bothered to correct any of them, that candidate is in real trouble.
.

Haven’t you defended all of Bush and Cheney’s outright lies? Didn’t you vote for them a second time even though they outright lied about WMD in Iraq?
.
I guess you only hate the liars on the left of the political spectrum?

erieangel:
.
All polticians lie at some point in their career, I believe it is inherent in their “business” to do so. The only difference is how and when they get caught in the lie.
.
Your WMD’s “lie” has never been proven. I did and still do support the decision to go into Iraq to eliminate one of the worst dictators since Adolf Hitler. To free a people who had lived under this known dictator for over 34 years. Coupling this with the fact that Sadam in his actions, and in his statements led us all to believe he did indeed possess WMD’s is enough evidence to take him out. Anyone who believes that Sadam was worth saving or not putting him in check is a moron.

I see nothing that I said that would draw one to conclude how I look at it one way or the other.

“Support your man right or wrong only shows you to be ideologues rather than reasonable people.”
.
It’s funny you should say that when you called me an ideologue many times I never defended Blumenthal’s huge omission.
.
I said that he should step aside and get out of the race all along.

“Your WMD’s “lie” has never been proven.”
.
That and your concept of how kind and wonderful the other dictators of the world are could fill about two hundred entries.
.
We all know that the amazing abilities to handle oneself with true valor in combat and, arguably even harder, to pick up where you left off in civilian life is not the same thing as being good in serving in public office nor in running a business since neither involve being shot at.
.
The two are no more related than being a gifted mathematician and being a basketball player. There is no correlation between being good at one and being good at the other.
.
The Bush WMD lies were 100% about his being president.
.
It all comes down to what professional propagandist Josef Goebbels figured out: small lies will cause a huge amount of problems, but big, big lies work wonderfully for those willing to deceive.
.
He should never have done so, but, since it is not directly about his ability to be a senator, it is a relatively small lie.

Patrick,
.
Was not refering to you. Paul is who I was refering to.

“Was not refering to you. Paul is who I was refering to.”
.
Then you are going to stop mischaracterizing me as an ideologue or are you going to mischaraterize Paul for such?

“He didn’t lie about being in the military. He meant to say he served in the Vietnam ERA, not the Vietnam war”

And he said time and time again! And he was captain of the swim team too.

He didn’t lie and Bill Clinton didn’t have sex with that girl

Here is the match-up: Blumenthal who exaggerated service in Vietnam. Not good.
McMahon spending millions to get elected. Partner in WWE. Promotes bogus, vulgar sporting events. Sport that encourages steroid use causing the death of some participants. Classy?

Good point.
.
I have relatives in Connecticut who are going to vote for Blumenthal based upon his nearly 30 year long record of good service in Connecticut and, even more so, to vote against McMahon.
.
If Blumenthal does not drop out, it is better to have somebody who told one really out-of-line lie or have it said for him without his correcting it than have somebody who, when telling the truth makes you nauseous.
.
Some people get a kick out a pro-wrestling when they are drunk.
.
I think I would have to be on heroin to find pro-wrestling entertaining.

Patrick, in the early 50s that was about all that was on TV. When I was a kid, before we had TV, we went to friends houses to watch. I learned to really dislike it.
It has become totally corrupt. If people like it for entertainment, fine I guess. But, I don’t like boxing either. At least wrestling is feigned violence. But, still corrupt.

I’m not into boxing, but, I respect it for being exactly what it says it is: to big men beating the fk out of each other.
.
At least it’s honest.

Since I was in ‘nam, I’m completely unforgiving of those who toy with whether they did or did not serve there.

Was he lying or was it just the typical “poor choice of words”?
.
Blumenthal: “When we came back, we were spat on; we couldn’t wear our uniforms.”
.
You decide!
.
Blumenthal has repeatedly said that he served IN Vietnam . I can understand mis-speaking once or twice about something even this important, but not multiple times. Sometimes he used more ambiguous language, but the intent has been clear.
.
Not only did he not serve in Vietnam (he served in the Marine Reserve in Washington), but he obtained 5 or more military deferments to avoid going to war, a practice that many other politicians have been attacked for.
.
I don’t have a problem with someone not wanting to be drafted. Maybe it’s because I’m young but I believe in an all-volunteer military. What I have a problem with is someone lying (often in front of heavily veteran audiences) about having fought in a war, knowing that that so many other thousands did.
.
Don’t fall for this typical “mis-spoke” BS that the politicians always try to get us to fall for. It’s embarrassing.

Difference between DICK and Jane Fonda?

Jane actually went to Vietnam.

See Dick run.
.
Run Dick.
.
See Dick get deferment. Defer, Dick, defer.

Blumenthal lies! Forget the crap about he “misspoke” or his dog ate his homework or he didn’t inhale or whatever else this lowlife has to say. He’s the epitomy of what we don’t need as a Senator or an Attorney General. If he had any integrity, he’d resign as Attorney General and withdraw his name from the Senate race, but we all know better, this scum will continue to lie and cheat his way to the November election. The good news, the citizens of the state of Connecticut have had it with this lying POS!

So, because on SOME instances he was accurate about his record the instances where he intentionally lied or distorted that should be disregarded? That’s an interesting moral stance you have chosen to take.

Yet inaccuracies in statements by former President Bush, some due to faulty information, are almost always referred to as lies on the forums at Time. Situational ethics?

The difference between a lie and a misstatement is totally shaped by party affiliation on this board.

“Yet inaccuracies in statements by former President Bush, some due to faulty information, are almost always referred to as lies on the forums at Time…”
.
When Blumenthal let a lie be told about him without correcting the important difference between taking his life in his hands and not, it did not cause any deaths. When Bush cherry picked the bits and pieces of intelligence out of an ocean of information that there was no reason to attack Iraq, he forced tens of thousand of American military personnel to take their lives into their hands and caused the death of tens of thousands of people abroad and inspired terrorist by fulfilling bin Laden’s prophecy that the US wanted to take over all Muslim countries to steal oil (our original plan to pay for the war) force Muslim women into prostitution due to poverty (an indirect result, especially true among refugees from Iraq who are without work) and impose a forced conversion to Christianity upon them (which, obviously, didn’t and isn’t going to happen).
.
Some lies are worse than others but none are good.

“The difference between a lie and a misstatement is totally shaped by party affiliation on this board.”
.
1) One is a false implication rather than a direct statement. The difference is very minor and not very significant.
.
2) See 3.12. Who and how many died due to Blumenthal’s misstatements? Who and how many died in Iraq?

Connecticut voters are trapped between choosing a man who told a lie that did not cause any material harm but was, very understandably grievously insulting to those who did put their lives on the line in Vietnam or a person, when telling the truth, has no skills or potential to serve the needs of the country well nor ideologically similar to the mainstream political views of Connecticut.

I don’t remember the last time or if there ever was a time when half of my motivation was not voting against one candidate was even stronger than my voting for the person I was voting for.

If I were in Connecticut now, I would not vote for Blumenthal, but, I might vote against McMahon.

Unfortunately, with a two party system, those two are one in the same thing.

I am going to ask anybody and everybody to respond to this:
.
Have you ever 100% voted for a candidate rather than voting against their opponent?
.
Have you ever seen a candidate and said to yourself, “Wow, this person really believes in exactly the same things that I do!”?
.
I would love to see far more political parties. I would love to see a labor party. I would love to see a successful Green Party. I would love to see a Social Democratic Party. I would even like to see separate Libertarian and Conservative Parties in addition to the Republicans.
.
There is a concept used in Australia called “automatic runoffs”. That is, for every seat with more than two candidates, you vote for your second choice and, if there are enough candidates, your third or fourth choice. The first choice are tallied first. When nobody gets more than 50% they go for second choice plus first choice to see who wins.
.
If we had that, Bumenthal would have no chance. His opponents from the left and center would eat him alive.
.
Unfortunately, we have a choice of only two viable candidates and both parties would loose out if we had more choices.

Patrick: “One is a false implication rather than a direct statement. The difference is very minor and not very significant”
.
No. Here are two quotes from Blumenthal:
.
“When we came back, we were spat on; we couldn’t wear our uniforms”
.
“We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam”
.
Neither of these are implications, they are direct statements (lies).
.
One of Blumenthal’s former opponents in the race (dropped out), Rob Simmons, has served IN Vietnam and received 2 Bronze Stars. Would’ve been a nice contrast, instead we’re stuck with this Blumenthal joker and the ex CEO of WWE. Riveting.