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:


2 Key Words to Great Personal Health Care

Jud Anglin

As the drama that is Obamacare continues to play out this year, there are the two key words you will want to focus on in order to ensure you get top notch health care. Jud Anglin shares them, here, and explains why they will be so important in the coming year. Read on...

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

A Unique Way to Play the Health Craze

Greg Guenthner

With the rise of the organic food market, people are becoming more and more health conscious, and thus, more aware of what goes into cultivating their food. But there's one aspect of this market that's long overdue for a massive overhaul, and that could present a very lucrative investment opportunity. Greg Guenthner explains...


How to Invest in a Strong Dollar World

Chris Mayer

Our friend Jim Rickards and founder Addison Wiggin believe the dollar will soon meet its demise. Chris Mayer, on the other hand, thinks the dollar will only get stronger this year and next. We'll let you decide for yourself. In this featured essay Chris lays out his train of thought and a guide for investing in a strong dollar world. Read on...


“How to Get Rich” is Not How You’d Expect

Chris Mayer

The first thing you might notice about the life of Felix Dennis is that he devoured crack cocaine during massive orgies with hookers at his mansion. Yet despite his penchant for sex and blow, he admitted, "making money is the one addiction I cannot shake." And thankfully, he wrote a book about it. Chris Mayer explains...


Bitcoin: Buy Now or Forever Hold Your Peace

Chris Campbell

Bitcoin has been pretty quiet lately. But that doesn’t mean big things aren’t taking place behind-the-scenes for the digital currency. In today’s Laissez Faire Today, Chris Campbell pulls back the curtain and shows you how bitcoin is quietly slipping into the mainstream. He also shows you why now could be the time to buy now, or forever hold your peace. Read on…


Maestro
Will The Swiss Vote to Get Their Gold Back?

Ron Paul

The Swiss gold referendum in November is far more important that many people realize. The outcome could quell or confirm doubts about the amount of physical gold available at the New York Fed. And that could send the price of gold higher by multiples. Dr. Ron Paul brings you up to speed on what's happening in Switzerland...


Here’s the Market’s Next Hot Sector…

Greg Guenthner

According to my friend and fellow technician Ryan Detrick, The Russell’s quarterly win streak of 8 is the index’s best performance of all time—even topping two monster runs in the 90s. So if small-caps are slipping, where can you find the next hot sector? The answer might surprise you…