re: #486 lawhawk

Greets and saluts from the NYC metro area.

A question to the masses. Why do candidates think that they can get away with lying/exaggerating about their military service. Do they really think that they can get away with the lies and not be called out for their lies?

Do they hold such disdain for their constituents? Paladino is the latest in a line of candidates this year that have lied about their military service. In Paladino’s case, he claimed to have commanded 250 troops at Fort Bliss over a period of six months. Turns out that he did no such thing. He was at Fort Bliss for 3 months, and commanded some number of troops upon his return to Buffalo.

Why exaggerate about your military service? If you lie/exaggerate about that, what else are you willing to lie about. Moreover, you dishonor those troops who do serve honorably in the Armed Services.

I absolutely agree that lying about military service is so contemptible as to be almost beyond language.

I’ve noticed a larger question over the last few years that’s similar to this: in our presently voyeuristic intrusive everything-youve-ever-done-is-subject-to-scrutiny-and-distortion media culture, how does ANY candidate running for office fail to check their frigging closets first? Palindino’s is the latest, Meg Whitman’s really brought it to mind. The details of her housekeeper situation are squishy enough to be forgivable, in my mind — BUT: as a candidate running for a ridiculously high-profile office in a state where candidates routinely fall under the most minute scrutiny, running on a platform that contains a strong “control immigration” element, how do you NOT look at your own staff and their documentation BEFORE YOU EVEN RUN???????

Is it arrogance? Contempt for the electorate? Brain-dead stupidity? (A caveat — I do not believe this is an ideologically-driven thing — it seems to crop up in small races, large races, conservative, liberal, yada yada.) I just don’t get it. I’m not remotely sympathetic to those who fail to check their own closets then get called on it. But with all the investigative tools available to candidates, this just does not compute.