Lying, Serial Lying, and the 2016 Presidential Race ~ VIDEO

by Dr. L. John Van Til

Clinton and Trump
Voters are left with a choice between the type of liar they want to vote for? Compulsive lies, serial lies, pathological lies, or white lies.
The Center For Vision & Values
The Center For Vision & Values

Pennsylvania – -(Ammoland.com)- Article VI of the U.S. Constitution prohibits a religious test as a qualification for any public office in the United States.

This was a topic of interest just before the presidential election in 2012. And why?

Because Republican candidate Mitt Romney was an active leader in the Mormon Church, and to millions of conservative Christians, Mormonism was not part of the Evangelical movement in America. They applied their own informal religious test to Romney’s religion.

It did not measure up. On election day, millions of them stayed home. Romney lost.

I, for one at that time, anticipating this result, suggested that conservative Christian voters apply a different test for the office of president and ask about the candidates’ moral standards, using the Ten Commandments. Of course, there is no moral perfection this side of heaven, but most Americans would agree that Mitt Romney met this standard well. It appears that this suggestion fell on deaf ears, or was trumped by a religious test, since millions of conservative Christians did not vote in 2012.

What about these two tests and the current presidential election?

It’s clear that both candidates have volunteered their own personal religious test for office, a practice not required nor forbidden by the Constitution. Hillary Clinton has made much of her activism in the Methodist faith while young, claiming that it still guides her decisions. Donald Trump has emphasized his Presbyterian roots, especially while speaking to Evangelicals. On the surface, each has applied the religious test for office to themselves. Members of those denominations, however, may expect the candidates to meet membership requirements. Methodists and Presbyterians probably expect their members to contribute, attend meetings, and live moral lives governed by the Ten Commandments.

Turning to the question of morality, we ask:

What would happen in the current presidential election if thoughtful people, Christians and others, applied a moral test to the candidates? What would be the result if the Ten Commandments—which condemn, among other things, cursing and swearing, adultery, lying, stealing, and greed—were applied to Clinton and Trump?

A candid evaluation of their words and behavior suggests that these candidates have been for a long time, and continue to be, unapologetic violators of the broader spirit of the Ten Commandments in general and have made the violation of several of them in particular into imaginative art forms. That is to say, they can spin the truth beyond recognition. Since failure to tell the truth—lying—is a leading moral failure of these candidates, let’s look into its meaning. Synonyms of it include deception, deceitfulness, and falsification, among others. The core meaning of lying is “a knowing and intentional stating, or claiming, that something is true when, it is, in fact, not true.” The reverse is also lying. Students of lying discuss several varieties of it.

Among them are compulsive lying, serial lying, pathological lying, and white lies.

The public has been treated to an endless parade of these deceptions by both candidates for more than a year.

For example, everyone knows that Hillary Clinton lied about her use of a private email server to store secret government documents. The FBI’s examination of it revealed that, in fact, government secrets were on it.

When caught in her lies about the server, she said it was a “mistake” and that she was sorry. Perhaps she was sorry she got caught. Is this an example of compulsive lying (lying as a matter of habit)? Or, something more—a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth?

As for Donald Trump, everyone knows that he tells his audiences that his net worth is at least $10 billion. Publications like Forbes and Bloomberg Billionaire Index clearly show that his net worth was/is, in fact, much closer to the $2.9 to $4 billion range. Is the difference a matter of business judgment, or, perhaps, a case of telling an untrue made-to-dazzle story? To many, his claimed net worth seems to be a story intentionally and knowingly exaggerated to the limits of belief. Trump has also claimed that he is a member of New York City’s famous Marble Collegiate Church. Recent searches of its records do not indicate that he has ever been a member of that church. Is this a clerical error or a falsification of the truth?

Unfortunately, as everyone knows, the candidates lie so much that it is now difficult to know which of their statements are true and which are false. To be sure, this is a fact-checker’s nightmare. Of course, these conditions leave citizens in a difficult position as they vote. That both are persistent liars is obvious. Are voters only left with a choice between the type of liar they want to vote for? Perhaps.

This election is surely best described as a disaster for American presidential politics. No matter which candidate wins, American citizens lose. There is, however, a lesson to be learned here. Looking ahead to future presidential elections, voters should be encouraged—no, urged to examine more closely—the moral fiber of potential candidates well in advance of the election season.

— Dr. L. John Van Til is a fellow for humanities, faith, and culture with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. His latest books are Thinking Cal Coolidge and The Soul of Grove City College: A Personal View.

  • 3 thoughts on “Lying, Serial Lying, and the 2016 Presidential Race ~ VIDEO

    1. NONE OF THE ABOVE. This box is what is needed on the ballot. When None of the Above gets
      more votes than the lairs running for the office do, those lairs are removed from the ballot
      and a new set of lairs are put on. This country is in big trouble.
      On one hand we have the Clown, the Con man who doesn’t want to release his tax returns,
      because we might find out what he is really up to, the Bigot, the Bully, the Draft Dodger,
      and the Lair, Oh sorry that last is a prerequisite for public office. Whose EGO won’t even
      fit into the White House.
      On the other hand we have the Friend of Wall Street, the BIG Money Crowd, Foreign Islamic
      Governments, (thanks for the donation by the way), the Career Politician (haven’t we had
      enough of these all ready), the Queen of Scandals (how many? I’ve lost count), a master liar
      of the first order, and Obama’s rubber stamp.

      People Vote For “NONE OF THE ABOVE”

    2. Hillary is without the worlds most evil liar, even more so that Bill. In last nights debate she jught she also said somethingst face to face lied to all watching. Remember when Bill looked into the camera and told the nation ” I did not have sexual releations with that woman”! One main objection on the second amendment is to alter it is some way, we have heard that many times. Last nignt she also said regarding Supreme Court appointments that she would appoint Justices that “see the world as the rest of the world sees the world” That is scary.
      I loved Mike Huckabee’s comment regarding abortion. He called out all Cathlics, Christians and other believers. You cannot vote for someone that thinks it is ilegal to kill a baby days before birth and even to the point that only the feet remain inside the mother. That is wrong.

      Hillary is the evil of all evils on earth, liar of all liars and crooked of all crooks. If you are American, Christian, Catholic, a gun owner, believe in out Military and the respect they desirve along with law enforsement. or the rights of the people of the US you cannot VOTE FOR THAT CROOKED, EVIL WITCH!

    3. If people examine more closely—the moral fiber of potential candidates they would have to eliminate all current politicians, their families, relatives and their friends. Who’s left? Only the working class

    Comments are closed.