I have been following the George Santos saga with the same perverse fascination I watched the "The Office": every time I thought Ricky Gervais could not become more offensive, he always managed to go lower. In a similar fashion, Santos's lies proliferate. Now he has credible accusations of stealing puppies from Amish farmers. A fiction writer could not make this stuff up.
Unfortunately, Santos is not the only Republican fabulist. Florida Representative Anna Paulina Luna appears to have misrepresented her family's origins. The most recent Republican Pinocchio is Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles. His claims to be an economist and an expert in human trafficking cannot be verified by any credible evidence.
What shocks me is that a vetting process would have exposed these lies and misrepresentations. As a university professor, I have always been asked to prove degrees, publications, and work experience. Are you telling me that political parties do not check out their candidates before placing their names on the ballot? If so, the average public school teacher or nurse is subjected to more scrutiny than members of Congress.
To add insult to injury is the zeal with which Republicans seek to ban books, intimidate teachers, and demonize librarians. Rather than subjecting school districts to censorship, shouldn't they prove their capacity to vet their own candidate successfully? If you can't avoid a liar like George Santos, your political party lacks the expertise necessary to lead our country.
