Perjurers and politics: what bothers you more - what someone lied about or how far they went to lie?

Question

I'm not trying to "score points" for either side. I'm just wondering what people think.

Is the subject matter of the lie what's important? Lying about your golf score, for example, versus lying about a stock fraud scheme that affects thousands?

Or is it the lengths one goes to lie? For instance, compare merely claiming to "forget" a conversation about the stock fraud, versus demonstrably falsifying one's golf scores at the club and asking several of your golf buddies to lie for you. (Assume, for argument's sake, that there was a valid million dollar bet that was in court, and therefore the score was important.)

Seriously, which bothers you more?

I'm not sure I know the answer myself!

Thanks. :)

Thanks for answers. My question was faulty. Please assume the "forgetting" was under oath also.

Since I screwed up the question, I'll grade "on the curve." :)

B.U.T. - I miss the avatar, but ya gotta do what ya gotta do. :)

Sorry again for being unclear. Oh well.

I was trying, ham-handedly, to create cases based on Clinton and Libby. But some important legal facts are changed, of course.

Who will I manage to offend next? :)

Answer 1

I care when it affects the way you do your job that I hired you for. If you lied about your golf score, but aren't dirtectly involved with judging a golf round or professionally playing it, I don't care. If you are president and lie about your personal; life, I don't care. If you are HEAD OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT and LIE about how you handled your JOB, I have a HUGE problem with that. If you do that, you are effectivelyt destroying all credibility for a dept that belongs to the PEOPLE.
EDIT: LOL! Is my nonsense easier to stomach if you can look at a pretty girl? ;) I was thinking of changing my name and avatar back...you may have just inspired me to do so!

Answer 2

Lying under oath is worse because it actually means something. Who cares about a golf score? What happened to being a man (or woman) of your word? Let your yes be yes and your no be no. Side comment to biguglytruth: A president lying about his personal life does not bother you…what about when that lie is used to obstruct justice? Clinton’s “personal lie” was told in a civil lawsuit brought by Paula Jones to try and prevent her from being able to sue a sitting president. Is this wrong? Lying to prevent justice? In this case, lying about your personal life is a big deal.

Answer 3

Perjury is worse.

Most people tell lies every day -- it's almost demanded by social courtesy -- "so nice to see you" "looking forward to lunch" "hope you come back soon"

But lying under oath is different. That's the whole purpose of having an oath. To make the distinction clear.

Without truth under oath, the entire political and legal systems would collapse.

Answer 4

No matter how you look at it a lie is a lie,an lieing about a lie to a congreress or court is perjury so bottom line a lie is a lie.

Answer 5

"Oh what a tangled web we weave . . . "

To me it's more a question of lying vs. refusing to answer. Gonzales (we are talking about Gonzales, no?) at first lied or said he didn't remember. This time he refused to answer. Both were lies, of course.

All politicians lie, but lies are worst when they are about matters having a direct bearing on their jobs. Clinton lied about Monica, and I didn't approve of that of course. It was sleazy but it had nothing to do with his job performance. But Gonzales is our nation's chief law enforcement officer, yet he puts himself, and the rest of the administration, above the law! I can't imagine a more obvious example of malfeasance, can you?