Baldface lies?

Just what is a baldface lie? Indeed, is there such a thing? I have been using that phrase for as long as I can remember. My wife, who is from a different part of the country and a different generation entirely uses it also. However, it does not appear in my handy dandy dictionary of cliches. It only appears there as barefaced lie. I conclude that baldface lie must be a local variant, perhaps a western thing.

According to my wife a baldfaced (barefaced) lie is a lie someone tells when they know it is a lie. Fine, but that doesn't explain why it is called a baldfaced one, or even a barefaced one. It is suggested that it has something to do with the absence of a beard although what that has to do with it eludes me. Anyway, consider some examples. When Romney says he has been a hunter all his life, when in fact he has only hunted twice, once as a boy and one other time, does that constitute a baldfaced lie? I would certainly think so. As his Mormon brethern are loading him with money I guess they don't care if it is baldfaced, barefaced, or even a lie.

How about when Bush said Iraq was trying to get yellowcake from Africa? Cheney and others knew that was not true. Did Bush know it was not true? Was it a baldfaced lie or just an ordinary lie, or perhaps, from the mouth of an innocent, not a lie at all? Personally, I think it was a baldfaced lie. Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. A baldfaced lie. They have planes capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction to the U.S. Another baldfaced lie.

When Condi Rice said no one expected the terrorists to use a plane was that a baldfaced lie? Yes, I fear it certainly was. When Cheney insisted on a connection between Sadam and Osama? Bigtime baldfaced lie. Indeed, our vice-president, Dick the Slimy, has to be the all time champion of baldfaced lies. I'm doubtful that he ever told the truth in his life. Again today he insisted that progress is being made in Iraq - at the very moment those in the green zone were being warned to wear their flak jackets because of the mortar fire into that presumably safe zone. Someone once said, you can go to hell for lying, the same as stealing. If that is so, and if I were Dick the Slimy, I'd be worried as hell.

There are also such things as little white lies. I don't believe any the hundreds or thousands of lies told by the Bush/Cheney administration ever come under this rubric. If there is one thing that characterizes the Bush/Cheney administration it has to be their unrelenting, persistent, monumental, deliberate, calculating, blatant lies. And these lies have not been told to us in order to protect us from something. There are no noble motives behind the lies of this criminal administration.

Then there is the phrase, lying through one's teeth. It has been suggested that the teeth might signify a smiling, shameless lie. Now it's pretty obvious that most if not all of these Republicans lie through their teeth (how could they not, they have the best dental insurance money can buy, unlike the forty or so million Americans who don't). If you have teeth you have to lie through them. I don't know about the smiling part but there is little doubt about the shamelessness. It is perfectly obvious that neither Bush nor Cheney have any shame (or guilt either as near as I can tell). If they experienced either of those emotions they would have resigned long ago.

A delegation of 11 Republican Congressmen had a 75 minute private meeting with Bush, Rice, Snow, and others in the White House (I guess Cheney wasn't there - too bad) and told Bush very bluntly that he has no credibility and has to stop lying about the situation in Iraq. I am not certain that Bush has the capability to stop lying about it and it remains to be seen if he will accept their advice (he never has accepted any up until now). I guess they suggested he leave the assessment of progress in Iraq be left up to General Petraeous. In other words, get someone else to do the lying. I guess we should see this as a positive development and a further example of the cornering of the rats, many of whom have already abandoned this sinking ship of state. Now even some retired generals are going on tv protesting this stupid illegal slaughter.

35,000 troops have been told they will deploy to Iraq in August. This, they say, will allow the surge to continue into 2008. Remember, in January the surge was to last three months, then it was to be September, and now it is to be sometime in 2008. Bush/Cheney have no intention of ever withdrawing from Iraq, certainly not until they can force the Iraqis to sign over their oil to Western Corporations. As this is one of the conditions the Iraqis have to meet, and as they are not stupid enough to give in to it, there is no end in sight. Where are the democrats? Sucking their thumbs, as usual. Never have so many spineless few done so little for so many.

Watch out! Watch out! The Iranians are coming! We might have to talk with them!