I’ve been wrestling with this issue and how to illustrate it in a reasonable fashion for a few weeks now.

Since I do have a day-job that takes more than the “normal” amount of intellectual effort, I have had some difficulty in expressing my concerns when I try to post during the work week.

Despite the definite leaning of the source compiling the quotes, what you find here at Think Progress exemplifies the fundamental problem that the administration of President George W. Bush currently has (emphasis and formatting retained from the original post):

A significant moment during today’s White House Press Briefings:

QUESTION: Scott, a couple of years ago you told us that Scooter Libby and Karl Rove had nothing to do with the CIA leak. It appears that you may have gotten bad information before you made that statement.

Now today we learn through extrapolation that, when the vice president said in September of 2003 that he didn’t know who sent Joe Wilson to Niger to investigate the claims that Iraq was trying to buy yellow cake, that he was not speaking the truth.

My question is: Can we be confident that when we hear statements from the White House in public that they are truthful?

MCCLELLAN: I think you can be, because you know that our relationship is built on trust. And I have earned that trust with you all.

As you pointed out, you pointed back to some past comments that I made, and I’ve talked to you about the assurances that I had received on that.

McClellan is emphasizing to the reporter that he was just relaying the assurances he received from Rove and Libby. In other words, they lied to me.

McClellan’s answer differs significantly from when he was asked the same question back on July 11, 2005… (the post continues)

Despite the claims of the mindless cheerleaders of the administration, there does come a point where (using the correct expression, not the mangled version of George W. Bush), “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me,” begins to take hold and people begin to question the credibility of those who have been proven so wrong more than once.

How can you tell a politician is lying when he speaks?

His lips are moving.

Perhaps, just perhaps, those Founding Fathers of ours who are revered so highly that we try to keep the interpretation of their beliefs frozen in amber for our Supreme Court Justices (according to one school of thought, that is…), perhaps their belief in the wisdom of the majority was not unfounded.

Eventually, no matter the spin, no matter the biases of the press or the blogs, the truth comes out and the consequences follow.

This is not related to the Miers nomination, nor to anything else other than the spin-machine of the administration that seems to have been focused on gaining or retaining power for the administration, not doing what is right for the nation as a whole, for the entire nation, even those who do not agree.

I am pulling together a number of threads of this nature, this is only one piece. I hope to have something to publish soon, when I am not distracted.