"Obama? I wouldn't vote for
that socialite."
That's what a man in Pennsylvania
said when I was making phone calls for Obama during the last presidential
election campaign.
If you don't know the difference
between a socialite and socialist, you are a prime candidate for the U.S.
Republican debate team.
Although we are in the midst of
the great information explosion of the 21st century, the Republican debates and
discourse flourish in a fact-free zone.
Recall Michele Bachmann's charge
that Obama would be spending $200 million a day on a trip to India -- a bizarre conclusion announced
publicly to Anderson Cooper on CNN. And she was off the factual mark on other points about Social Security, jobs, debt and her
charge that the HPV vaccine might cause mental retardation.
Then there was Rick Perry, with
his frightening declaration that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme -- when in fact there is not a shred of
similarity between Social Security and a Ponzi scheme. Social Security is
funded with real money -- taxes on wage-earners and employers. It's a
pay-as-you-go system that can only pay out what it collects in real money. If
there is a shortfall in the future after the $2.6 trillion Trust Fund
runs out, Social Security benefits would have to be reduced by the amount of
the shortfall -- unless the law is changed. In contrast, a Ponzi scheme is built of smoke and mirrors -- illusions.
When the smoke clears the illusion disappears and the investors lose
everything.
Herman Cain, another candidate
who steamrolled ahead with popular support, could also have benefitted from a
quick Google search, or even a glance at Wikipedia. But why bother, when the
facts might challenge your ideology? Cain loves Jesus and loves conservative
ideology -- so Jesus, he concluded, must have been a conservative and,
therefore, Jesus was convicted by a liberal court. Nice try, Herman, with your
convoluted logic -- but this claim won't hold up in any court. The Sanhedrin
that convicted Jesus was a conservative court . It was dominated at that time by the
conservative Saducees, who represented the elite and wealthy class. The
Pharisees, who more closely represented the masses, were in the minority on the
court. A minor impediment to Cain's campaign, especially in light of his other
knowledge shortfalls -- including his shocking ignorance about Libya -- but it's an important example of
ideology trumping reality in Republican rhetoric.
The remaining leading candidates,
Romney, Santorum and Gingrich have also been cited for spewing false facts.
To undermine Obama's record on defense Mitt Romney claimed, in the Florida debate,
that the U.S. navy is now smaller than at any time since the start of World War 1,
when, according to data from the Defense Department's Naval
History and Heritage Command, there are more ships today than during George W.
Bush's last term. Newt Gingrich took credit for balancing federal budgets that
were voted on after he left Congress. These are just a few Newt and Mitt manufactured "facts."
What about Rick Santorum ? A New York Times headline reads : "Dutch Puzzled by Santorum's False Claim of
Forced Euthanasia." Was Santorum pandering to his right-to-life followers?
Or did he cast aside the truth in order to undermine the Netherlands' program
of universal health care? Either way, he made an outrageous
charge without bothering to check facts.
Santorum has also charged that
rolling blackouts have been caused by Obama's defective energy policy, when
it's been shown that those blackouts are often planned to prevent more serious
blackouts and others could just as well be caused by squirrels .
Ironically, Ron Paul, the
Republican candidate with the least support among Republicans, is rated as
having the best record for truth on the Truth-O-Meter report card.
How can we short-circuit the
"fact" frauds? I thought of a solution when I recalled Ross Perot's
independent run for president in 1992 and 1996. I didn't like much of Ross
Perot's politics but I did respect his style of going to the chalk board , listing basic facts on
charts and building his arguments and discussions based on the facts as he
saw them. If you wanted to dispute him you would have to challenge his clearly
parsed information -- a method that offered a foundation for a legitimate and
intelligent debate.
Thinking about Ross Perot made me
wonder, "What if instead of using news anchors and political commentators
to moderate debates we enlisted elementary school teachers? I imagined my
fifth-grade teacher, Mrs. Morrow, managing a debate:
"Now Herman, go to the chalk
board and write the word 'Sanhedrin.' Show the class that you can spell it
correctly. Then tell us what the Sanhedrin is, how many judges were on it and
their political affiliations." After that, 'Now, what did you say about
Jesus?'"
Then Mrs. Morrow would send Ricky
Perry to write down the definition of a Ponzi scheme, with examples -- perhaps
including the nefarious activities of Mr. Charles Ponzi himself. She would
follow by asking him to show how his definition related to Social Security --
point by point.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
