Merrill Matthews

I have come to the point that I cannot believe a thing President Obama says. That’s not quite the same as saying I don’t believe anything he says. When he speaks he may be telling the truth, he may not be, or he may be parsing his words to mislead. But it’s impossible to know which is which?

It has been his pattern since, well, forever, as John Heilemann and Mark Halperin demonstrate in their excellent book on the 2008 presidential election, Game Change.

One revealing passage recounts Obama’s decision to run for president. The authors quote him in 2005 telling Senate Chief of Staff Pete Rouse, “I can assure you there’s no way I’m running [in 2008].”

In 2006 he told Meet the Press’ Tim Russert that he would “absolutely” serve out his full first term in the Senate. “So you will not run for president in 2008?” Russert is quoted as asking. “I will not,” Obama answered.

The president criticized his opponents for saying he was against drilling for oil and gas. He then boasted that oil and gas production have been higher than ever under his administration.

Later, Obama-confidant Valerie Jarrett questioned him about the absoluteness of his response. Heilemann and Halperin quote Obama as saying, “You can always change your mind.”

Yes, you can, and have, Mr. President, which partly explains the public-trust deficit. Thinking people who reflect and debate issues do sometimes change their mind. (I know I do.) But dissimulators can also use it as an excuse to dismiss previous statements to the contrary.

Does anyone — ANYONE — really believe Obama wasn’t virtually certain he would run for president in 2008 even though he absolutely denied it to Russert? So how does one know when the president means what he says vs. plans to become a “mind-changer”?

With respect to Syria, the president tells us there will be no U.S. boots on the ground. Um, would that be like:

  • If you like your health coverage you can keep it. Most people won’t be able to
  • Health insurance premiums for a family would be $2,500 lower by the end of his first term in office. They were actually about $3,000 higher
  • The Obama administration was not responsible for proposing the budget sequester idea. Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward challenged this claim and forced the administration to backtrack
  • Money from the nearly $800 billion stimulus package would be spent on “shovel-ready projects” and unemployment would drop to 5.3% by the end of his first term. The president later conceded the projects weren’t as shovel ready as he had hoped and unemployment was 7.9%
  • There was nothing Obama could do about Benghazi. Subsequent revelations and congressional testimony have shown just how disengaged or disinterested the administration was
  • The Justice Department told a judge that Fox News reporter James Rosen was a “co-conspirator” and a security threat? The DOJ later apologized and tried to make amends with Washington reporters
  • That Attorney General Eric Holder didn’t know about the Fast and Furious gun-running program? Investigators have found documents confirming that he did have knowledge.

Or how about when Obama told Fox News host Bill O’Reilly that he hadn’t raised taxes when there were 21 new or increased taxes in Obamacare alone. Or when he claimed that he didn’t draw the “red line” with respect to Syria, the international community did, when it is very obvious from his taped statements that he alone drew the line.

And when Obama or his team aren’t asserting something that is demonstrably false, they are frequently making claims that might be technically true, but are intended to mislead.

For example, during the last presidential campaign the president attacked his critics because they claimed that the size of government had grown under his watch when it had actually decreased.

The fact is that the number of federal employees had increased significantly, while the number of state employees had declined, primarily because of tight state budgets. Taken together the total was smaller. But the president had no control over the hiring and firing of state employees. So while that number declined, he had nothing to do with it. Where he did have control, federal employees, that number had grown.

Take another example. The president criticized his opponents for saying he was against drilling for oil and gas. He then boasted that oil and gas production have been higher than ever under his administration.

Yes, but the vast majority of that drilling has been done on private land — where the president has no control. As for drilling on public lands, which his administration does control, drilling was significantly lower.

Was what Obama claimed a lie? Not technically, but neither was it the truth, because it was purposely intended to mislead.

These are only a few of the many, many instances where Obama or his minions have been caught in false, deceiving or misleading statements — even under oath. It has become so pervasive that people have grown very skeptical of the president’s assertions.

Yet amazingly, some of those same skeptics now defend Obama’s claim that U.S. troops will not be used in Syria. Would that be like his absolute denial to Russert? Maybe Obama means it, or maybe he’ll change his mind. No one can know for sure.

The country needs to be able to trust a president and his staff and believe what they say. But that’s not the case anymore. Maybe Heilemann and Halperin would have better captured the moment if they had named their book Mind Change.

Regards,

Merrill Matthews
for The Daily Reckoning

This article originally appeared at Laissez Faire Today

You May Also Like:


Syria and the Perpetual War Economy

Chris Mayer

Whether you agree or not that the U.S. ought to strike Syria, there is one reason it will: Because it has to. (Indeed, the bombing may already have started by the time you read this.)

Merrill Matthews

Merrill Matthews, Ph.D., is a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation, a research-based, public policy “think tank.” He is a health policy expert and weekly contributor at Forbes.com. He also serves as Vice Chairman of the Texas Advisory Committee of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

  • billstclair

    And this is surprising? Being a stellar liar is a job requirement for any elected position, especially a federal position. I didn’t trust a word Bill Clinton said, either, but I sure enjoyed listening to him talk.

Recent Articles

5 Min. Forecast
The “Snowflakes” that Will Cause the Next Financial Crisis

Dave Gonigam

The debt and leverage that Washington and Wall Street have built up over the years will eventually blow up. And when it does, it could be "worse than 2008." But there is at least one way to protect yourself. And today Dave Gonigam explains how you can get started before any of this occurs. Read on...


The Massive Energy Deposit that No One Can Get to… Yet

Byron King

By now you've probably heard about the violence in Gaza and Isreal. It's tragic, but there's more to it than the mainstream media lets on. Today, Byron King explains how, amid the conflict, there's also resource scarcity behind the Israeli-Palestinian crisis - namely, in the enormous offshore natural gas deposit known as "Leviathan..."


Your Chance to Profit from Amazon’s “Crazy” Prediction

Matthew Milner

Last year, when Amazon announced they would be using drones to send packages to customers, a lot of people saw it as a clever marketing ploy just in time for the holiday shopping season. But, as Matthew Milner explains, this use of drones could soon be widespread, and that presents a unique investment opportunity for savvy investors...


Addison Wiggin
One World, One Bank, One Currency

Addison Wiggin

After the 2008 financial crisis, little could be heard over the deafening cries of "mission accomplished." And while the Fed's massive QE program seemed to work, the question remains: for how long? Addison Wiggin explains why the next round of QE will fail miserably, paving the way for the IMF to step in with something called "special drawing rights." Read on...


Who’s Really Profiting from Drone Tech and How to Join Them

Wayne Mulligan

Despite what you hear in the mainstream news, the commercial market for small drones could eventually dwarf the military one. In fact, it’s already happening. This is a big market, and it's getting bigger by the day. Today, Wayne Mulligan explains how to get in on the ground floor. Read on...