Free Speech Can’t Live with Lies

According to scholars Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, the bi-partisan duo who recently published It’s Even Worse than It Looks, “Viral emails and word-of-mouth campaigns are expanding sharply, mostly aimed at false facts about political adversaries”(p. 66).

Last November, the Washington Post’s Paul Farhi reported, “The email rumor mill is run by conservatives.” Since 2007, among the 79 chain emails about national politics deemed false by the Pulitzer Prize-winning PolitiFact.com, only four were originated by Democrats.

Here’s an example from right wing conservatives:

“President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a ‘lawyer.’ He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to escape charges he lied on his bar application….Michelle Obama ‘voluntarily surrendered’ her law license in 1993, after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud! Keep this moving—educate others.” (Emphasis added.)

These allegations are simply lies.

The Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois verifies that the Obamas are not currently authorized to practice in Illinois. (https://www.iardc.org) However, according to PolitiFact.com, the Illinois Supreme Court also confirms that no public disciplinary proceeding has ever been brought against either.

By voluntarily inactivating their licenses, the Obamas sensibly avoid a requirement to take continuing education classes and pay hundreds of dollars in annual fees. Both can practice law again if they choose.

So the truth is entirely different from the malicious email.

At the core of our exceptional society rests truth telling—in business, in personal relationships, and in the public realm. We’re not free to write fiction and claim it as fact. We abhor lying and prosecute perjurers and con artists.

And we generally understand that ideas are like products in a free market: willing buyers and sellers depend on facts not fabrications.

At the heart of our speech freedoms rests truthfulness. It’s disappointing that Republicans who place such emphasis on personal responsibility aren’t practicing what they preach.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

To Lie or Not to Lie?

According to scholars, as living things evolved they developed deeply entrenched characteristics to avoid becoming victims and to succeed as predators. This impulse to deceive enables survival, and those that are unable to fool their predators or their victims die, leaving survivors without any sense that deceptive behavior is wrong—except among human beings.

Humans alone have developed ethical codes of “right” behavior that prohibit “a lying tongue.” From the Ten Commandments to common law, we decry deceptive practices and perjury, and severely punish transgressors—except politicians.

The 2012 presidential election race has by many accounts witnessed an unprecedented number of brazen lies. We should be asking why? In most cultures there is a social contract that creates a shared self-interest in the truth. We don’t want others deceiving us, so we agree not to deceive them.

So why do candidates and their staffs think they can lie? Is it because our evolved nature instinctively drives us to cheat—because we can’t help ourselves?

Is it because slinging mud at an opponent produces votes—and takes time and campaign dollars to wash clean?

Is this why we cry “foul” when opponents lie about our candidates, while crafting commercials that lie about theirs?

Americans rightly believe that transparent rule under codified law produces a fair opportunity for all to participate—a principle at the core of our competitive strength and our creativity.

Yet if we tolerate deception and fraud by our leaders, the ability to pursue life, liberty and happiness is sorely tested, as is our right to free speech, which itself depends on truthfulness.

Whether on the political left or the right, we are impelled by our history and our future to object vigorously to lies and deception.

We’ll have to employ solid judgment to distinguish between legitimate differences of opinion and outright dishonesty, but until we protest behavior that cynically insults our intelligence, we’re doomed to watch the sleaze worsen.

But then that’s the reason we have the right and the duty to vote.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Confirmation Bias

In legislative deliberations, Congress increasingly rejects scientific findings in favor of persuasive lobbying positions and political dogma.

This behavior is reported in their most recent work, It’s Even Worse than It Looks by American Enterprise Institute’s Norman Ornstein and Brookings’ Thomas Mann, who have impartially studied Congress for decades.

Science starts with a hypothesis, reviews existing knowledge, designs new studies to collect impartial evidence, and draws conclusions reported in unfathomable journals.

Law makers and lobbyists on the other hand lead with their conclusion. They “research” examples to “prove” their case and advocate “findings” as persuasive evidence for action. Their efforts are more easily digestible and distributed via pithy sound bites and social networks.

In other words, scientists work hard to be impartial, while advocates, well, they work.

Turns out legislators are just like the rest of us. They select information to confirm what they already believe. Think “weapons of mass destruction,” of which you’ll recall there were none, for an example of how “cognitive dissonance” and “confirmation bias” present real and present dangers.

Importantly, this differs from the behavior of vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan. His widely-rebutted twisting of “facts” in the current election is called lying. However, our eagerness to cling to his untruths in the face of contrary evidence is driven by a need to align our facts with our fictions.

And when our elected leaders disavow evidence in favor of belief—again, think “WMDs”—the consequences can be grim.

Just how should we decide to fight wars, increase or decrease the deficit, go into or get out of debt, raise or lower taxes, or subsidize or deny healthcare for all?

While in the absence of available science we must rely on leadership and our Constitutional principles, wouldn’t we do better when possible to use objective data rather than ideology and dogma?

Recognizing the difference between these alternatives has never been more important.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Lead or Get Out of the Way!

Can America still compete? Although the United States has led the world in agricultural and industrial production, we’re now threatened by global competitors as science and technology, freer markets and cheap labor make foreign economies grow.

Fortunately, embedded at the United States’ core are two principles that have made us strong—and that at all cost we must preserve in our struggle with menacing levels of debt and economic foreboding.

First is our constitutional commitment to rule by law, which levels the playing field and reassures entrepreneurs, investors and workers that the game will be fair—and provides recourse should that not be so. In contrast lie nations whose rules are inconsistent, less transparent and more corruptible by money, sex and politics.

This pursuit of fairness—of equal opportunity to play, not of equal result—is a defining American characteristic. Our rule by law makes both our market and our personal freedoms possible.

Second is our diversity, with its rich mix of cultural experiences that studies confirm generate more robust inspirations. In nations with homogenous populations, cultural practices are well established, and changing them is difficult. Things remain a certain way because that’s the way they’ve always been!

Unfortunately, political trends threaten both of these advantages. First, Congress is shamefully ineffective in law making, apparently confusing absence of rules with freedom. There are many on Capitol Hill who block action rather than enable innovation. They’d rather move backwards or stand still, than to lead or get out of the way.

Second, instead of recruiting international talent, we’re raising, not lowering, barriers for legal immigrants who create jobs, not just take them. And we still resist women and minorities at the highest level, denying ourselves the wealth and inspiration of fresh ideas.

As we respond to global competition we should consider how we’ve succeeded in the past. We need leadership not bickering. We need to heal our differences not open new wounds.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Are We Exceptional or Ordinary?

At the core of our Constitution lies justification for what conservatives call “American exceptionalism”—an obligation to deliver freedom and democracy to the world. This ideology, created “under God,” has assumed new clout with the union between political and Christian fundamentalism—a marriage that threatens both our personal liberty to achieve as we choose and to have an equal opportunity trying.

And at the core of this democracy lies individual freedom. While a majority decides, the minority is protected from tyranny by specific rights and legal recourse. Over two centuries, our model has produced unprecedented social and economic opportunity for all.

Comes today. We see legislative bodies at all levels falling sway to religious dogma—a Christian version of Sharia Law. In the United States Senate a minority now blocks every legislative action, even those that both parties have agreed on. Instead of majority rule, we’re witnessing a minority takeover with disastrous consequences. This is unprecedented in U.S. history.

Take the always-inflammatory argument over a woman’s right to self-determination. There is a national consensus that aborting a fetus should never be a casual choice, nor seen as birth control. But without surrendering her equal right to intercourse, it must always be a woman’s decision to continue or end a pregnancy. We must rely on her—not a congressman, nor a priest, nor a judge—to be the author of her circumstances.

If we believe individual self-interest is wiser than the brightest committee, then we must rely on women’s judgment about motherhood. If we don’t, and instead impose collective decisions, we sacrifice the personal freedoms we claim to hold dear.

Politico-religious ideology devalues each of us and erodes our claims to exceptionalism. Abandoning our reliance on private decision making undermines the foundation on which we stand with such pride.

Instead of being exceptional, we become quite ordinary.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Solutions Versus Slurs

The United States, built by men and women from diverse cultural backgrounds, is among the most innovative nations in history. Our cultural narrative includes the conception that we’re a “melting pot,” folding different customs into a system of practices that drives our global leadership. Our diversity is the yeasty source of solutions for our many challenges.

However, in the yin and yang of progress, our very success has us cling to outdated ways and refuse admission to new populations. Despite evidence that diversity drives our power, many of us despise Others.

These clannish dynamics are at work in our 2012 election. Political parties and the electorate haven’t been more polarized for 150 years. Party platforms and personal identities are passionately differentiated, and complicated by our ancient fear of the Other.

For millennia, people who were different from us were a threat. Even today we prefer to flock with birds of our own feather—with people who think like us and who make decisions like us—and build literal and metaphorical walls to preserve our communities.

Look at President Barrack Obama. His father was a Kenyan Muslim and his mother a Christian from Kansas. He’s the product of an interracial marriage, born in Hawaii and raised in Indonesia. Many see him as profoundly “Other” and confirming their belief are the presidents engraved on the bills in their wallets.

Even though demonizing Others serves to shut out new ideas—the energy source for innovation and economic growth—we still do it. While the vast majority abhors intolerance and we’ve made its overt expression illegal, the Internet is awash with ugly comments about the President’s Otherness—about his race, birth, parentage, nationality and political legitimacy.

In tolerating such filth, we’ve become our own worst enemy. Confronted with unemployment, debt and war, should we not seek and discuss solutions on which to build, not toxic slurs on which to divide?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sorting fact from belief

Congress has cried “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war.

Driven by ideology and dogma the Republican and Democratic Parties are tearing at each other’s throats and eviscerating reason from the body politic. Compromise is treated as a disease and collegiality seen as an infection.

And we, the people, cheer on from the hustings.

Beneath us all lies the certainty of our rightness, which we bolster with “evidence” that confirms our beliefs. We’ve abandoned science and reason, and confused beliefs with facts. And we use selection bias to cherry pick proof that solidifies our certainty.

Yet in the depths of our souls, might there not be tiny, niggling doubts that raise questions?

“Can all these other people be completely wrong, and we absolutely right? Are there no shades of grey, no nuance worthy of our consideration?”

Tempted by suspicion, we take reassurance from those who affirm our rightness. We cling to our favorite media personalities and news sources to the exclusion of others, and shun material that challenges our positions. We hate being made uncomfortable.

All of which, as the 2012 general election nears, should give us pause.

When our ballots are counted, will we have elected a Congress that employs reason and honest debate to frame legislation addressing our immense challenges? Will Congress once again become a free market of robust ideas and creative solutions?

Or will we continue to parade behind leaders who march us lock-step under dogmatic banners, framed by special interests and ideologues?

Our problems are too large and the opportunities too great for blunt-instrument thinking. We need women and men in Washington who lead through their disciplined understanding of complex problems and their vision for a future that embraces all Americans, not just a privileged few.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment