An interesting story in the New York Times (yes, consider the source) about Rudy Giuliani’s persistent use of inaccurate or misleading statistics to puff up his record in New York City. The most puzzling thing: In almost every case cited, the actual, accurate statistics bolster the points Giuliani was making on his own behalf. So why not just use them rather than gilding the lily?
Is this a Ronald Reagan-like use of apochryphal tales and imprecise data to illustrate points that are basically valid? Or is it a Bill Clinton-like tendency to lie even when you don’t have to?
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.