Talking of lying liars reminds me of Obama and his promise . . .

Well, I was talking of lying liars in my previous post, and it did remind me of Obama and the bare-faced whopper he told a few months ago of which the inestimable, but increasingly histrionic, Glenn Beck reminded me last night.  During passage of the Medicare Bill, the POTUS stood before the cameras and, in that beautiful baritone voice of his tuned to maximum 'sincerity', accused those who had put it about that federal funds would be used for abortion were just plain liars.  He went further, and in an effort to win over the recalcitrant Bart 'Stoopid' Stupak and his handful of followers who were refusing to vote for the Bill, Obama actually issued an executive order insisting that federal funds were not to be used for abortion.  The half- and out-witted 'Stoopids' dutifully trudged through the voting lobbies, or whatever they do 'over there'.  Now we learn that in certain states federal funds are being used for abortion - so no surprise there, then!  You may read the details over at The Weekly Standard.  I'm beginning to understand why Obama is so eager to get cosy with really world class liars like Putin, and that dreadful little Iranian squirt with the useless tailor, he just feels comfortable with them, I think.

Also, it is, I suspect, one of the reasons why he is in the Democrat party.  Their members speak with tripod-forked tongues, mere forked tongues being insufficient for purpose!  Karl Rove, himself a man whom I wouldfeel the need to count my fingers after shaking his hand, carries out in the WSJ as neat and clinical an evisceration of Democrat lying as you could wish to read anywhere.  He harks back to the post-Iraq war II blame-game that went on with an embattled president defending himself against not only the Democrat party and their selective memories but an almost totally complicit MSM acting as recruiting sergeants for his opponent in the election.  Here are a selection of quotes from sundry Democrats concerning the WMD in Iraq after the war was over:

All the evidence points to the conclusion [that the Bush administration] put a spin on the intelligence and a spin on the truth: - Sen. Edward Kennedy [himself a model of truth-telling all his life!]

It is time for a president who will face the truth and tell the truth. The administration has a problem with the truth: - Sen. John Edwards, [then a presidential candidate, whose now ex-wife will tell you how much he reveres the truth.  His line was supported by Sen. John Kerry the truth of whose Vietnam war record was, er, corrected by his old 'comrades'.]

According to Wiki, Sen. John Kerry said this on October 9th 2002:

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security

Rove reminds us that:

Of the 110 House and Senate Democrats who voted in October 2002 to authorize the use of force against his regime, 67 said in congressional debate that Saddam had these weapons. This didn't keep Democrats from later alleging something they knew was false—that the president had lied America into war.

Senate Intelligence Chairman Bob Graham organized a bipartisan letter in December 2001 warning Mr. Bush that Saddam's "biological, chemical and nuclear weapons programs . . . may be back to pre-Gulf War status," and enhanced by "longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Yet two years later, he called for Mr. Bush's impeachment for having said Saddam had WMD.

Rove provides some other pungent quotations from leading Democrats, all of whom turned on Bush and mounted a campaign to impune his honesty:

On July 9, 2004, Mr. Graham's fellow Democrat on Senate Intelligence, Jay Rockefeller, charged that the Bush administration "at all levels . . . used bad information to bolster the case for war." But in his remarks on Oct. 10, 2002, supporting the war resolution, he said that "Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America."

As for Kennedy, he did oppose the war motion but still said this:

the month before the vote that Saddam's "pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated." But he warned if force were employed, the Iraqi dictator "may decide he has nothing to lose by using weapons of mass destruction himself or by sharing them with terrorists."

And then we come to Al Gore, an expert on truth, honesty, global warming and masseuses:

Al Gore, who charged on June 24, 2004, that Mr. Bush spent "prodigious amounts of energy convincing people of lies" and accused him of treason, bellowing that Mr. Bush "betrayed his country." Yet just a month before the war resolution debate, the former vice president said, "We know that [Saddam] has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Now, be honest, no irony intended, don't you think a born-again liar like Obama would just feel reallycosy-comfy in that crowd?  And is it not the most exquisite of delicious humour to watch them now, all lying to each other!

 

Comments

[Dom]

"... increasingly histrionic, Glenn Beck ..."

Finally, you're catching on. Ignore this man, he's a big part of the reason that conservatives can't be taken seriously.

[David Duff]

I'm afraid we will have to disagree on this one, Dom. As I indicate, Beck does have a histrionic side to him, or to put it in theatrical terms there are times when he's just an old ham! He seems to me to be in the tradition of American preachers and/or salesmen. To an old-fashioned Englishman, like me, it was, to begin with, very off-putting but then I listened to what he actually said rather than worrying about how he said it. I think he, and his team, have been extraordinarily good at digging into the backgrounds of the people in the Obama administration and informing us all of the frightening results. From 'over here' I don't see anyone else in the MSM doing it. Would Van Jones have been outed without Beck's efforts? I'd never even heard of Van Jones until Beck went after him!

I think you have to understand the audience he is aiming at. They are not, I guess, political or philosophical sophisticates - in that sense, when it comes to the arcane details of US politics, that includes me because I'm a foreigner, and he has a superb technique for explaining - or teaching - or preaching, I suppose - quite complex ideas and information. His 'lessons' on the early progenitors of the American progressive movement were superb. For example, I had never heard of Saul Alinsky until I listened to Beck.

Were I to become president of the USA (now there's a thought to induce a shudder!) I would immediately award him the Congressional Medal of Freedom.

[dearieme]

"I had never heard of Saul Alinsky until I listened to Beck." But the only bits of Alinsky's advice that I've seen quoted were straight out of the Thomas Jefferson play-book.

[David Duff]

Can you elucidate that cryptic remark a little, 'DM'?

[Dom]

Haven't you ever noticed that DM gets a bug up his ass when Jefferson is mentioned?

[David Duff]

Well I wish he would explain why. Jefferson, from the very little I know, was very human with all the frailties that implies but I would struggle to find a wiser bunch of men than the Founding Fathers.