Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama a Very Smooth Liar
It isn't quite fair to call Barack Obama a liar. During the campaign he carefully avoided committing to much of anything important that he might have to take back later. For now, I won’t quibble with The St. Petersburg Times’s Obamameter, which so far has the president keeping 30 promises and breaking only six.
And yet, broadly speaking, Obama has been lying on a pretty impressive scale. You just have to get past his grandiloquent rhetoric — usually empty of substance — to get a handle on it. I offer a short, incomplete list, which I’m sure others could easily enlarge.
- Obama portrayed himself as the peace
candidate, or at least the anti-war candidate. He is not a peace
president, nor is he stopping any wars. True, he promised military
escalation in Afghanistan (to blunt John McCain’s accusations of
wimpishness), but well-meaning folks believed their new hero would
genuinely move to end the occupation of Iraq and seriously try to
negotiate with the Taliban. Instead, he has not only increased the
number of troops and attacks against the Afghan insurgency, he has also
expanded on George Bush’s cross-border raids into Pakistan, which have
killed many civilians. The way things are going, Pakistan could become
the new Cambodia and Obama the new Nixon.
In Iraq, Obama has promised to withdraw all the troops . . . unless, which means that we’re not leaving. Whether it’s 50,000 troops remaining at the “invitation” of the so-called government of Iraq, or just enough to man the 14 permanent military bases, or some combination of U.S. military personnel and private mercenaries that exceeds 50,000 soldiers, our army will almost certainly stay in Iraq past the stated deadline of Jan. 1, 2012. - Obama said he wanted to reform Washington and
“fix” its “broken” system of corrupt lobbying. But Obama is neither a
reformer nor a skilled legislative mechanic. Hatched from the Daley
Machine in one-party Chicago, Obama wouldn’t be president today if he
rocked boats. Witness the appointment of Roland Burris by the corrupt
former Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill Obama’s Senate seat: not a word of
public protest from the new administration because Burris is a made man
in the Chicago Democratic organization. So what if “Tombstone Roland”
can be heard on the U.S. attorney’s wiretaps of Blagojevich, dancing
around the delicate question of how to raise money for Blago without
appearing to be buying his seat.
As for pork-barrel politics, Obama named one of its greatest champions, Chicago’s own Rahm Emanuel, as his chief of staff, and the new budget (as well as the “stimulus” package) is loaded with pork. Meanwhile, have you heard anything serious about campaign-finance reform from Obama? Not very likely from someone who refused public financing and still has about $10 million left over from record receipts of $745.7 million. It’s just a detail, I know, but Obama’s naming of former Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn III as deputy secretary of defense seems to be at odds with the president’s alleged crusade against special interests and the “revolving door” between private business and government. He has also “sold” ambassadorships to campaign donors. The biggest plum, London, is slated for Lou Susman, a Chicagoan and former Citigroup executive who bundled $239,000. Paris has been reserved for Charles Rivkin, who raised about $500,000 for Obama. - Obama, with his Arabic middle name and
his big Cairo speech, wants people to think that he is the Muslim
world’s new best friend. Well, the photograph of a cheery Obama with
Saudi King Abdullah and a smiling Emanuel with Saudi Foreign Minister
Saud al-Faisal, proves the contrary. The Saudi royal family hates the
idea of representative government for ordinary Muslims and is cruelly
indifferent to the fate of the Palestinians. A democratic, independent,
partly secular Palestine could only make the Saudi oligarchy look bad.
Thus, the House of Saud is perfectly happy with the status quo, and so,
evidently, is Obama.
Without Saudi pressure, there will be no resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, since Saudi oil is the only lever that would cause America to press Israel into making real concessions. Indeed, the president doesn’t mean for one minute to force Israel into anything more than symbolic withdrawals of its illegal settlements on the West Bank. Meanwhile, the Saudi elite continues to play its double game, paying protection money to extremist Islam and granting pensions to the relatives of suicide bombers. It’s just politics, say Barack and Rahm, grinning ear-to-ear with their sleazy new friends from Riyahd. Just keep the oil pumping around election time and all will be well. - Obama makes like he’s a friend of
organized labor, at least he did during the Ohio primary when he needed
to beat Hillary Clinton. At the time, he put out a flier headlined
“Only Barack Obama fought NAFTA and other bad trade deals” and charged
that “a little more than a year ago, Hillary Clinton thought NAFTA was
a ‘boon’ to the economy.” In a debate with Clinton on Feb. 26, 2008, he
said, “I will make sure that we renegotiate [NAFTA] in the same way
that Senator Clinton talked about” and “use the hammer of a potential
opt-out as leverage” to get “labor and environmental standards that are
enforced.”
But two months ago, U.S. Trade Rep. Ron Kirk said such a blunt instrument was no longer necessary and that the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico were now “of the mind that we should be looking for opportunities to strengthen [the North American Free Trade Agreement].” And, of course, there is no discussion at all about renegotiating Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China, a “bad trade deal” that has done even greater harm to American workers and unions than has NAFTA.
Meanwhile, as I noted in my April 15 column, “Wall Street sharks circle the UAW,” Obama and his banker friend Steven Rattner are liquidating the United Auto Workers even as they liquidate the American auto industry. Robert Reich, Bill Clinton’s pseudo-secretary of labor, said as much. “The only practical purpose I can imagine for the bailout is to slow the decline of GM to create enough time for its workers, suppliers, dealers and communities to adjust to its eventual demise,” he wrote last month in the Financial Times — no surprise, considering that Obama’s chief economic adviser remains Lawrence Summers, a champion of deregulation and “free-market” economics in the Clinton administration and very much the enemy of labor unions.
Yes, of course it’s nice to have a president who speaks in complete sentences. But that they’re coherent doesn’t make them honest.
- Posted in




128 Comments so far
Show AllI have no problem calling him a liar. And worse.
Do you think Jesus needed or used a teleprompter?
I am amazed everyday when talking to people.
They still think this guy is a great speech giver and act like they don't even know that he is reading the crap that flows from this guys mouth. He lost my support a long time ago. He is a
great lier and that is a dangerous thing. Just think what would have happened if Bush had been as good!!! Speaking of Bush that was the first thing that put me off obama. War criminals must be
prosecuted no matter how inconvenient it is. I took the Obama sticker off a long time ago.
another thing was when he went to the Jewish lobby group the day after being nominated. I am feeling sad every day watching the corporate news and knowing that my tax dollars are killing kids in the countries that this empire is trying to subjugate. Then you see this cia operation in Iran trying to overthrow. the government again, I suppose to install another shaw of Iran...It is amassing that those people go to the streets and the lazy ass americans let bush steal the election in 2000. This is truly an amazing country....I will not even start on the health care lie!!!
Bush said history would redeem him. Well, he is starting to look about on equal footing with the Democrats.
For me he's starting to rank right up there with W., though W wasn't a PHONEY...
W was just as much a phoney, just a different kind of phoney. Think Texas strut on the USS Abraham Lincoln with his custom made jumpsuit and it's overstuffed and overstrapped crotch.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
This article is being WAY too nice.
I agree... To use a StarWars analogy...
Obama is like Lando Calrissian who betrays Han Solo and Princess Leia and Chewey (Courage, Virtue, & Will)...
When they are in the Cloud City during "Empire Strikes Back"...
Remember the "how could you?" moment when they walked into the trap...?
Lando's response was... "Sorry Bro, but They got to me first"...
I am afraid that was the case with Obama... Growing up in private prep schools has not helped him to identify with the common man...
Scholarships to prestigeous schools often come with strings attached...
Working for the Ford Foundation by sitting on various blue-ribbon boards was his version of community organizing...
He has been groomed for this role whether Broke Owebama is aware of it or not...
He was surrounded by war criminal advisors like Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinsky during the campaign...
His war chest was filled by the Banksters' coffers of illl-gotten goods...
of course they "payed to play" to get their chosen appointees...
And I doubt there will be any last minute heroics to spring us loose from the clutches of Empire...
Nor will he come galloping to the rescue in his trusty Millenium Falcon during the Sequel...
Rather, Obama has demonstrated to all that it matters not who is wearing the crown...
He will still unleash the power of the deathstar to destroy millions of innocent lives on Alderon...
Obama has peeled back the mask of empire to reveal a hideously disfigured MAnnakin who is kept alive by a machine...
GM, I love the way you think, but who's Luke and where the hell is the Force?
I need a Light Saber...
"Yes, of course it’s nice to have a president who speaks in complete sentences. But that they’re coherent doesn’t make them honest."
Exactly. Obama is intelligent and articulate, but if you listen to his speeches he equivocates 2 or 3 times in each sentence. He uses so many qualifiers when he speaks that in the end he has said nothing, even though he has said it eloquently.
Many people noticed that during the primaries, but we were ignored.
We weren't ignored.
We were downright ridiculed by the people calling themselves "realistic".
Wanderer/sLiMsHaDy
Though I did not ridicule you or ignore you I did not agree with you and voted for Obama. I didn't drink the drink, but I tyhought it was the better choice of the two. I am one of those responsible for the Imperial Presidency.
My apologies and you were right.
Next time, remember this: if you vote for what you don't want, you are sure to get it. He may have been the best choice "of the two", but he was definitely not the best choice of the 3 or 4 or 5 - depending on where you live. I voted for the first African American woman presidential candidate last election without regret.
Of course, I assume you are referring to having voted for Cynthia McKinney in 2008. A wonderful candidate, though I voted for Nader. However, I do not believe she was the first African American woman presidential candidate. For the record, here is a list of African American presidential candidates, both men and women -- Frederick Douglass, Shirley Chisholm, Jesse Jackson, Lenora Fulani (she was the first African American female independent to be on ballot in all 50 states), Alan Keyes, Carol Moseley Braun, Al Sharpton, Cynthia McKinney, and Barack Obama. Did I miss anyone?
this is why I advocated people should have voted for Hillary Clinton. Nobody would go into the gate thinking they were cheated, conned, or lied to... and there would be more hard hitting coverage from left leaning voters and a regrouping and even a withholding of support and resource for future challenges.
...then again, I quickly realized the folly of my proposition by mid-June after the FISA flubbery online. Had Hillary Clinton won, Obama most likely would have voted against the FISA securing his brand of change even more, and he would have been championed even more, and a domestic color revolution would have ensued -which is exactly what Tom Hayden was pandering to Obama voters (especially the younger voter) if they didn't get their way at the Democratic Convention.
Protest and charge the streets, said so many in the left orthodoxy. Yep, had Obama lost in the primaries to Hillary, the orthodox of the left would have advocated a revolt in the streets. And Obama would be lionized as opposed to today where, slowly, and surely, he is being outed and called a liar. Now here's a question. Will comic soon to be (?) MN Senator, Franken, call Obama a lying liar?
odoco
Point this out to people - start looking for his 'nuances' and then tear him apart on them. Get people to see through his fog of rhetoric.
Reality will unveil rhetoric every time my friend. Watch the veil start to fall as he tries to push Waxman/Markey and Health Care.
let's face it folks - we've been had
its cold comfort for me to say that i was ringing the bell on obama a long time ago - due largely to information disclosd by the great journalist webster tarpley - who first id'd brother o as a nwo shill
look at the world today and we see one glaring fact looking back at us - we, the united states, have become a war machine ruthlessly attacking and murdering defensless people in iraq, afghanistan and pakistan just for starters
people who have no means to even return fire - bombed to hell by drones manned in omaha nebraska
we have "friends" like the saudis - easily the most corruopt and brutal regime in the middle east
we have asassin killers running around the whole middle east killing and murdering "targets" chosen by some unkown vampire deep in cheney's dark side
our mission there - despite what the bullshit sounds like - is to secure the gas and oil and the pipleines that carry them
our "enemies" are russia and china - the military wants the gas and oil and wants to be able to decide who does and who doesn't get any - read china - no gas or oil
at home, obama will not deliver health care - he will appear to try, as he must, but i think we all kniow that old dog aint gonna hunt
the recession grows and grows - housing defaults are at an all time high, credit card defaluts are at an all time high
tent cities sprouting out everywhere
meanwhile last week - here on cd - a bank of america exec was quoted in a story saying that "this year would be their best year ever"
talk about a tale of two cities
the rich nibble on beluga caviar and we, the sheeple, can suck eggs
yeh i'd say brother obama has spoken, asthe first nations say, with forked tongue
Anyone who still thinks that the two party system can give us anything substantial deserves to be had. Barack Obama is a disappointment only if you expected anything from him. I was disappointed in him, and should have known better, even though I voted for Ralph Nader. I suppose hope springs eternal, but so does disappointment.
Oh, and those idiots who put down Ralph, and insist an independent vote is wasted, what do you think of your democrat candidate now?
Go to Huffpost and read all the glowing tributes to the great Obama. The Obama kool-aid flows freely among the true believers.
Notice not a word over there about the war funding vote--a most inconvenient point.
I could not believe it...I searched everywhere for even a slight mention of this most important issue.! fluffpost is real gone...
On that site, the House Democrats and I believe a few senators post there also. Since Huffpost would always soak its site with more partisan posts, I gave up trying to read through them and I didn't even bother trying to sign up to post. Too many partisan koolaiders to conquer.
Welcome back Jennifer.
The comments on Huffpost are useless as well. For almost every article, there are at least several hundred useless drivel comments with very few useful ones. Huffpost is often known to censor. I lost my account when I took issues with Obama there. It was under one of those articles posted by Nancy Pelosi. I asked her about Obama's and her support of Dubya's policies and questioned her continuing of it. When I came back later that day, my post was not only removed but so too was my account. That site is completely disorganized and filled with too much frivolous infotainment. The celebrity articles and news get thousands and sometimes tens of thousands of responses. That alone is a sign of how completely ignorant our electorate has become. Some time ago, Sioux Rose brought up an excellent discussion with maxpayne on getting truly progressive television on the air and making that the new mainstream media. It is possible to reform television so that it becomes a truly useful medium for improving society rather than just another infotainment dumbing downer. The same could be said of the Internet. I cannot understand why more people, especially the supposed progressives, choose the crappy Huffpost site instead of CD or even Alternet. I'd say Huffpost ought to be renamed to fluffpost. It's nothing but a hot air site.
I got read about your health today from yesterday's posts and I'm sorry to hear about your car company and insurance. I hope you catch up in health and spirit. In general, I would not recommend Fluffpost at all. It gave me a migraine headache and most of us here are completely sickened by the Obama koolaid drinkers there.
Hi Carla. Thank you. I would much rather I didn't even bother with that fluffer site. Huffpost will only increase my blood pressure and I would like to live longer so that I might be able to succeed in helping others treat Gaia with respect and get to see a loving generation rather than the current apathetic and ignorant type. Let those Obama koolaid drinkers rot over there. :)
JenniferBedingfield
"I got read about your health today from yesterday's posts and I'm sorry to hear about your car company and insurance. I hope you catch up in health and spirit."
I got this from another poster.......I did not see it yesterday, whats the matter? I have been in Siberia for a while and have missed a number of things.....hope you are OK.
She's probably referring to the archived posts and comments on this site. Thank you btw. :)
Ariana Huffington is taking HUGE millions from US government. The Huffington Post is worse than Bill O Rilley's FOX Nation.
I never put down Ralph, my hero, and have never considered my independent vote a waste, but I did vote for Obama and THAT was a waste. I am impressed by how fast and thoroughly a vote can be betrayed. I've only voted for a Democrat for president 3 times in my 44 years of voting. McGovern didn't get elected and LBJ and Obama wasted no time betraying me. LBJ didn't abandon the working people like Obama did. Obama is throwing us off the boat with a steam shovel. Four years of him and we will be living in a Hell run by neocons. It's too bad McCain didn't get elected. At least everyone considered him loony and there would have been some brakes put on him. Obama is running on a wide open track with Pelosi running interference.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Oregoncharles
Yeah, I think you're right. If McCain had won, the streets would be full of angry peace activists. With Obama, where is the peace movement? In need of a laxative, is what I think.
You know what I think?
When I voted for Ross Perot
When I voted for Nader
When I voted for Obama
When I called my representatives
When I wrote cards and letters and emails
When I ran for local office myself
IT DIDN'T MEAN SHIT
Somebody tell me why I should bother to vote at all
Or even care
If you vote for third parties it means
A) You vote
B) You didn't vote for 'them'
If you don't vote is means
A) You don't matter to anyone
B) You don't matter to anyone
Um, thanks but I'm not really convinced. I'm pretty sure I don't matter to anyone whether I vote or not and no matter whom I vote for. I've tried it up, down and sideways and the result is always the same.
Not voting for "them" seems the same as not voting. I guess it does give me the option of being able to say, as so many have found the need to do on this board, "Fuck you guys; it's your problem - I didn't vote for him."
Elainem, welcome to my world. I realized a long time ago that 'democracy' simply means 'might makes right' using ballots instead of bullets (same word with the only difference being 2 vowels either way).
I respect everyone's right to try to get power by any means. I hope you give me the same respect as I try my best to bring your power mongering to a halt.
People tell me that if I don't vote, that I have no right to complain. That's like a rapist telling their victim that if they don't fight back that they consented to being sexually assaulted. I'll never consent to being ruled by anyone. On ballot day, the 'electorate' might legally have the right to run their fingers through my underwear but, they'll never do it with my consent.
I would like to say that my candidate has never been on the ballot in this country. In the entire history of this country (and many others) this candidate stands as a shining beacon of peace, freedom and justice. This candidate has never threatened anyone (except the tyrannical power mongers) and stands up for liberty for all peoples. This candidate is global in scope but local in action. This candidate will never let you down and represents us all, equally and fairly. Do you know who this candidate is? This candidate is named 'NONE OF THE ABOVE'. Until this candidate is on the ballot and has a shot at winning, I'll never vote.
I hope I've been able to help, Elainem.
Wow, where did you come from? I haven't seen you posting here before and I like your attitude. I'm coming around to your way of thinking. I have often voted against the incumbent, no matter what, but there's always an exception to that. I've often thought of writing in my own name or better yet, my Mom. But that's kind of a waste of time. I've always been proud of being a regular voter; local, regional and national, but I'm struggling with the futility of it. I'm not quite sure I'm ready to give up, but your point of view is refreshing and well stated and I look forward to hearing more of your views on Common Dreams. Thanks, Elaine
I also agree with Ralph's (and others) point that our elections and campaign system is corrupt, a sham. Nader knows very well that the current system makes it almost impossible for any non-Duopoly candidate to be elected.
Great post, ma g. As far as I'm concerned, talking out of both sides of your mouth at once is lying. Yeah, he's a liar. The good news is that he's taking our country down even faster than Bush and perhaps people will wake up to him sooner than later. We will see. Yes, we live in interesting times. It is too bad that people have to get hit in the head so hard to get their attention. And too bad that they will go around for awhile blaming the wrong people.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Thanks, but I knew that information when I pulled the lever for McKinney.
I too voted for McKinney.
Better to vote for what you want and lose, then to vote for what you don't want and win. I voted for Ralph, I know what the one party system has to offer.
Refused the kool-aid and voted Nader in all of the last three presidential elections. (P.S. But I also like and admire McKinney.)
Same here. I'll admit that on the third one I actually had a hard time trying to decide which one to pick at the voting booth. I wished both had run together. They would have been a dynamic duo in one.
Yes, "They would have been a dynamic duo in one".
They are really smart - why couldn't they figure that one out?
Nader did have a problem with the Green Party and for good reasons. The GP needs to stop conceding to the Democrats all the time. Despite all the concessions, the Democrats still crushed the Green Party out of relevancy. Nader tried to improve the party but after all the infighting, he left and he has a right to run as independently as he wants to. There have been some moments of recovery in the Green Party but they need to seriously quit conceding to the Democratic Party and stand firm. The Democrats did to the Green Party what the Republicans did to the Libertarian Party and this is completely cowardly and unacceptable. Since the Democrats and Republicans are the two major parties, why should they fear other parties? Unless they haven't been doing what they promised the voters, there's nothing for them to fear.
And there's the problem. It isn't that a third party candidate splits the vote and likely throws the election to the worst candidate of all, but that the 3rd party is actually several individuals all running against each other as well as against the two halves of the status quo. That really does make it hopeless.
Perhaps next time the 3rd party candidates on the left, at least, could organize themselves into one candidate for one party by election day. Or are there too many egos at stake?
Rainborowe
he's really a very good republican (if there was such a thing)
Yeah me too, (for Nader) but Ma G will tell you I'm just one of those TV watching types, and apparently there's too many of those like me- go figure......
schreiber you do watch too much tv
cmon you know it
by the way - i was with nader too, still am
Nope, and I know what the "f--k" to do with myself too ! (wink)
scheiber: if you know what to do with yourself then why are you watching so much f--ken tv
by the way, i'm happy to see so many folks voted for the alternative candidates
next time around let them try to talk about wasting votes....