ANOTHER 'WHY DON'T THEY?'

     It occurs to me that I must be incredibly naive.  When Republicans blatantly lie and distort truths, as those who claim that President Obama is out to ignore or defy the second amendment and take away every one's guns, when he is not, why aren't the Democrats putting out an ad demonstrating the speeches made to denounce the lies?  No matter how many times President Obama and Vice President Biden deny it, I believe it will only register if it is put out beside the lie. Yet, I realize that such an ad would only be watched by Republicans who wouldn't believe it anyway, just like the conspiracy theorists hear no truth.

     It is difficult for me to comprehend that our media can be so full of lies that I don't even watch commercials any more.  Why advertisers place so many ads at so much cost (that they just pass on to their consumers and stockholders), I will never understand.  I purposely never buy anything I see advertised on that basis alone.  My buying is chosen on the basis of my own research on products, recommendations of friends,checking ingredients, where something is made, what its purpose is and many other elements.

     Telling the truth should be so much easier in the long run than facing law suits, it would seem.  However, deep pockets consider law suits a normal part of business and can destroy smaller businesses who lack them simply by threatening phony law suits.  Courts should bear some responsibility before accepting such suits.  When a lawyer can get a judge to keep filing frivolous suits to punish an ex-wife, one would think the judge might refuse to prosecute.  The worst I have heard was the lawyer that sued his wife for failing to foster a relationship with his new wife whom the children disliked totally on their own.  Both children, suffering asthma, were cruelly subjected to car rides with their father and his new wife, both of whom smoked in the car causing asthmatic distress in both children which the adults ignored.,

     A more simplistic solution rather than letting the speaker say "My name is XXX and I approve this message."  The speaker must say on oath, "My name is XXX and I swear that what I speak is truth." or something that can be brought to court.  It would seem to me that with the disrespect being shown this current president, someone one might point out that law suits can be effective to convince the presenter to be more truthful if there are significant monetary and political consequences to the lies.  Even children are expected to have consequences to their misdeeds, why not politicians and those who endorsed ads?

     It would be comforting to hope that the majority of our country who like President Obama will hear his State of the Union speech where he will be able to state clearly, for the nth time, that he respects the second amendment and that people will still have guns according to the second amendment which does not specifically state that the gun is a musket nor an AK assault weapon used for wars.  It saddens me that our country has allowed enough militias to arm themselves for war against our government.  Too many people will suffer if the war is within our own country, the fist in over a hundred fifty years.