That's the title of a best seller I never read. What got me thinking on the subject is this: My guess is the author - like most of us, I suppose - tried lying at least once in his life and found he wasn't very good at it, not being clever enough to keep track of all the old lies and make the new lies dovetail with the old. I'm reminded of the novel 'Salem's Lot, wherein the vampire Barlow observes that there is no memory for the Undead. Similarly, I'd say the people of the lie have no need to remember their lies, or that they're lying - which makes them all the more believable. All they need is the ability to keep the audience emotionalized, so that not only will believers want to keep believing, but dissenters can easily become too consumed by anger to be credible, having forgotten why the truth matters, and eventually burn out and become converts. This way, both the positive and negative feedback serves to justify the liar, so that any consciousness of having lied is utterly obliterated. So when people of the lie do their thing, twisting your words any which way they can, accusing you of whining when you object to their serpentine behavior, and so on, do yourself a favor and refuse to partake of the very emotionalism which has made them what they are.
"The Road Less Traveled" is a pretty good read too. This is why arguing from complete honesty is easy to do. Those with an agenda find it difficult to debate. You see it here every day. At worst, you can be wrong. You don't, however, need to worry about ever being caught in hypocrisy, or a lie. That's when I realized I could never be a Democrat.
Unfortunately, the liar stops being a liar and becomes a fool at the exact moment he forgets that he's lying.
The difference between a liar and a fool is that the liar knows that they are lying. The fool believes the lie. The longer one remembers a lie, the more often one tells a lie, the more adamantly one defends a lie, the more likely that one is to forget the truth and in so doing make a fool out of them self.
Afraid I'm still not getting why the liar who knows he's lying isn't a fool as well. Assuming this refers to public exposure as a fool, again, that won't happen as long as the liar can keep his audience emotionalized, no matter how many times he contradicts himself. That's why, despite their treasonous conduct, Clinton and Obama both got reelected, and still have a great many followers today.
This is why I only discuss politics in places where there is a written record of the things said, exposing any lies and inconsistencies in print for any readers to see.
I have taken to recording all of my interactions with all of my customers, be it on the phone, in writing or in person.
This is an excellent policy (in states where it is allowed, in mine it is). I also recommend a written (computerized) "letter to file" file to record facts, dates, who, what, when, where, actions taken, accusations, etc. with respect to any controversies or even unusual occurrences in the workplace. There are scams running -everywhere- today in every industry with successful small businesses as the target, often involving complicit "regulators," and you will never know who the insider(s) is helping set up the scam. Remember those "black man kicked out of hotel/pool he was staying at and had a key" type events that pop up from time to time? Not saying those are all or mostly scams, but that sort of highly suspicious, fishy type event is something every small business needs to be very wary of. People to watch especially are employees/contractors who seem to have one foot out the door already.
It sorta works out getting your opponents emotional as long as they don’t realize that’s your motivation. People get dumb when they’re blinded by emotions(see relationships)
