tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith//264 2008-05-06T13:05:18Z Movable Type Enterprise 1.53 tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/deepak_chopra//572.39102 2008-05-09T12:58:57Z 2008-05-09T12:36:50Z

Clearly we have reached a critical point in the cycle of lying, because Obama's appeal remains strong, and although he has been diverted into negative campaigning, his opponent has paid just as dearly, if not more so, in her negative ratings.

Deepak Chopra Half-truths are the bread and butter of politics. This must be so where compromise is the only way to move ahead and warring constituencies have to be placated. But after Watergate personal dishonesty became a central issue, and the simmering contempt that Americans have casually felt toward "lying politicians" was ignited into something far more contentious. Bill Clinton was impeached for a lie that most husbands would at least attempt if caught cheating. This wasn't an indication that America sets a high standard of personal integrity but exactly the opposite: politics has become an arena for vitriol and personal attack. Everybody's untrustworthy if your opponent is cynical enough to keep hurling false accusations (hence the 20% of the public who believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim.) tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/daisy_khan//560.39134 2008-05-09T11:52:17Z 2008-05-09T12:39:13Z

We need a man or woman abounding in moral character, rich in wisdom and compassion, full of integrity and courage, a President truly capable of leading the most powerful nation in the world.

Daisy Khan futuwwah, which includes such characteristics as mercy, generosity, fairness, knowledge, humility, loyalty, and bravery.]]> tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/cal_thomas//290.39107 2008-05-09T10:53:56Z 2008-05-09T12:37:49Z

All politicians tell people what they want to hear, rather than what they need to hear.

Cal Thomas All politicians tell people what they want to hear, rather than what they need to hear. Too many care about themselves and perpetuating their political careers more than promoting the general welfare. If that is their goal, a certain diagnosis of their character has already been made. The key is discovering whether a presidential candidate has a core set of principles from which he (or she) will not deviate except under the most extreme of circumstances. Moral character is important, though people sometimes define such things according to their own moral standards. tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/nicholas_t_wright//362.39118 2008-05-09T09:47:13Z 2008-05-09T12:38:27Z

In the election for London Mayor the electorate was faced with a tricky, certainly dishonest radical left-winger who'd been in power for 8 years and done all sorts of crazy things, and a solidly right-wing super-rich playboy, very smart and totally untrustworthy. Does that sort of choice add up to 'democracy'?

Nicholas T. Wright As a Brit I am of course deeply interested in the U.S. elections because (as I think I've said before) they are really more important for my future than any UK elections. Shame I don't get to vote, though, when it will affect me as much as it will. Having said that, from where I sit it's hard to choose between Hillary and Obama. Both have big plus points and big minus points. I don't set much store beside charges of dishonesty during an election campaign -- these things are always overheated and anyone can be taken out of context and probably usually are. However the larger issue is important: as I've certainly said before, if people are dishonest in some ways they'll likely be dishonest with voters and parties and who knows what else. But . . . politics is about reality, not ideals . . . and I worry about the state of democracy worldwide (e.g. in the election for London Mayor the electorate was faced with a tricky, certainly dishonest radical left-winger who'd been in power for 8 years and done all sorts of crazy things, and a solidly right-wing super-rich playboy, very smart and totally untrustworthy. Does that sort of choice add up to 'democracy'? tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite//303.39117 2008-05-07T15:59:04Z 2008-05-07T15:18:28Z

I regret to say that I think the electorate, and not the candidates and elected officials, are most to blame for the wide-spread acceptance of the fact that it’s pretty much okay for people in public life to lie to us.

Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite The United States has become a “liar society.” I regret to say that I think the electorate, and not the candidates and elected officials, are most to blame for the wide-spread acceptance of the fact that it’s pretty much okay for people in public life to lie to us. People may respond to pollsters that they find this or that candidate less than honest, but it doesn’t seem to prevent them from supporting the candidate. tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/pamela_k_taylor//444.39129 2008-05-07T15:35:35Z 2008-05-07T15:17:40Z

Much of the apathy of the American voter can be laid at the feet of dishonest politicking. Many a non-voter has said to me "Why bother? They say what they think you want to hear during the campaign, and do what they like when they get in office."

Pamela K. Taylor www.pktaylor.com When I was a young voter, I was greatly impressed with Gary Hart's idealism. His positions appealed to me and I was prepared to vote for him in the primaries. That was all ruined by his claim that he was not having an affair, and his challenge to the media to catch him if he were. Which, of course, they did, exposing him not only as a cheat, but as a liar. Needless to say, Mr. Hart lost my vote. Not because he was having an affair -- God knows enough of us have succumbed to that temptation -- but because he lied about it. If he lied about one thing, I reasoned, how could I be sure all the rest of his positions were true reflections of his personal sentiment? I wasn't about to vote for someone I couldn't trust to work toward all the wonderful things he was proposing. tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/charles_w_chuck_colson//371.39121 2008-05-07T09:54:47Z 2008-05-07T15:19:12Z

The more important question is, does integrity matter in a president? Having served one flawed president and known a number of others, I would, if I had to make a choice, far rather see character than competence.

Charles "Chuck" Colson http://www.breakpoint.org The longer any campaign goes on—and nowadays they're almost perpetual—the more the charges and counter-charges build up. It's unavoidable in year-long campaigns that a lot of the negative stuff would stick. So the figures do not surprise me. The more important question is, does integrity matter in a president? Having served one flawed president and known a number of others, I would, if I had to make a choice, far rather see character than competence. Integrity goes to the very heart of what a person is. His or her policies may be very attractive, but if he or she can't be trusted, the policies won't matter. And a candidate's personal life, while privacy should be respected, is fair game because it informs us on matter of character and integrity. tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/susan_jacoby//328.39101 2008-05-06T12:10:54Z 2008-05-06T12:46:28Z

I cannot imagine any political process less suited to finding out whether a candidate is either honest or trustworthy than the American way of running for the presidency in an era when "character" is defined by shrinking sound bites and endless video loops on blogs.

Susan Jacoby I cannot imagine any political process less suited to finding out whether a candidate is either honest or trustworthy than the American way of running for the presidency in an era when "character" is defined by shrinking sound bites and endless video loops on blogs. I daresay that if any of us had been subjected to the continual and continuous scrutiny applied to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton over the past year, our ratings for honesty and trustworthiness would also have plummeted. People always seem less honest in the glare of publicity, because nearly everyone has something to conceal--or something that he or she thinks must be concealed for fear of public censure. tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/willis_e_elliott//504.39105 2008-05-06T10:42:11Z 2008-05-06T12:52:15Z

Here is a hopeful hypocrisy: while the virtue of truthfulness-honesty-trustworthiness has declined in the American populace, we the people judge candidates for office by this standard.

Willis E. Elliott change. Lectures may inform the mind, but it takes oratory to move the heart, motivating to action. In the history of American rhetoric, the Lincoln-Douglas debates stand out for massive public attention and for consequences, including Lincoln’s presidency. People got to hear each oration only once as the opponents traveled from place to place. The power was more in print than in presence: many hundreds of newspapers carried every word. Poor Hillary and Barack! Millions hear their rubber speeches (slightly stretched for each occasion) many times, boringly many times; and few read and ponder their words. That is the setting for this “On Faith” question: “The percentage of voters who find Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama ‘honest and trustworthy’ is declining as the campaign wears on. Why? From a moral standpoint, how important is this quality in a president?"]]> tag:newsweek.washingtonpost.com,2008:/onfaith/rajan_zed//524.39104 2008-05-06T04:18:11Z 2008-05-06T12:53:33Z

We would also appreciate some of the other virtues in him/her, mentioned in the dharmasastras, like compassion, purity, equanimity, fortitude, and hands off from untruth and greed

Rajan Zed Sucharit (good conduct or right behavior), sukkrit (good deed), and dharm (righteousness) are the basis of moral philosophy Hinduism prescribes for every human being and we would like to see these in our president. We would also appreciate some of the other virtues in him/her, mentioned in the dharmasastras, like compassion, purity, equanimity, fortitude, and hands off from untruth and greed. Satya (truth) is highly stressed in Hinduism and we think that it will be an important virtue we should look for in our next president. Upanishads state ‘satyam eva jayate’ (truth alone triumphs). Are we asking too much?