>SNIP
>>
>>I don't know about you, but he makes me very uncomfortable. If he will lie about little things, he will have no problem lying about the big stuff.
>
>I'm sure you could see this coming...
>
>Why is it that President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, Scooter and who knows who else are OK in your books? Were theirs only 'little things'.
>
>Just a curious non-voter.

What lie do you have proof of?

Maybe you are confusing a lie with something else. Here's a wikipedia definition of a lie:

A lie is a type of deception in the form of an untruthful statement with the intention to deceive, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, or to avoid punishment. To lie is to state something one knows is false with the intention that it be taken for the truth by someone else. A liar is a person who is lying, who has previously lied, or who tends by nature to lie repeatedly.

Lying is typically used to refer to deceptions in oral or written communication. Other forms of deception, such as disguises or forgeries, are generally not considered lies, though the underlying intent may be the same; however, even a true statement can be considered a lie if the person making that statement is doing so to deceive. In this situation, it is the intent of being untruthful rather than the truthfulness of the statement itself that is considered.


It is saying something that you KNOW is not true. If you are referring to the weapons of mass destruction, that was "possibly" a mistake. Then again there is no proof that there weren't WMD in Iraq. The fact that they haven't been found doesn't mean they weren't there. Personally, I think it is ludicrous to think Sadam wasn't developing them, given his history of developing them.