While I’ve had many of these thoughts floating around in my head ever since the 2008 campaign, it really finally hit me watching the State of the Union a week and a half ago that one word pretty much sums up President Obama and it’s “disingenuous.” He talks and talks and talks but nothing he says matches what he does or the policies he pushes for. You can see through everything he says, well except the media and his Leftist followers who drank the “Hope and Change” flavored kool-aid. While there are many examples of how and why he is disingenuous, I’m going to breakdown just a few.
During the tax rate debate back in December, and even well before that, President Obama claims he was working to jump start the economy while he was simultaneously pushing policies that worked against our economic recovery (I have more on that for another post). One of the most noticeable policies was his plans to raise taxes on the “rich” who are precisely the ones we need to help lift us out of this economic mess. They’re the ones who provide the jobs needed to create and sustain a recovery or to invest in our economy to help it grow, yet he wanted to take more money away from them. This money would be thrown into the black hole of our Federal bureaucracy and squandered. This is money that these people worked hard to earn and value and they would put it to good use, not just piss it away like the government does. Despite all the evidence out there, including pieces I’ve posted on here, showing how tax hikes hurt the economy, he still pushed to raise taxes on these people while claiming to help the economy. He lost his push to hurt those who will help us the most, thankfully.
Continuing on with taxes, during the State of the Union, President Obama called on Congress to cut corporate tax rates to help businesses grow and be more competitive on the international market. I was stunned. He said something I agreed with but I know it was all a lie. He doesn’t want to cut corporate taxes, you know tax rates for the companies he lambastes every chance he gets. The reason why this whole thing is utterly not only disingenuous but an outright lie is the fact that if he really wanted to do this, he would have pushed to include it in the tax bill that Congress passed and he signed into law at the end of December. There is no way he had a huge change of heart on corporate taxes in just a month. Had he pushed for this cut then, he could have gotten the Democrats credit for cutting corporate taxes instead of letting the newly elected Republican majority do the same thing and take the credit. He had a chance to do so and then claim to responsibility for the recovery that was would be soon to follow. Instead, he passed on that chance which will undoubtedly allow the Republicans to take credit for a recovery if they are able to pass a corporate tax cut.
Alright, I’m going to try to keep this section fairly short because I’m pretty sure I could write a book on it. Just one thing I’ve seen recently is that he’s interested in working with those who have ideas to improve his bill which has already been shown to actually increase costs instead of bending the cost curve down like he claimed repeatedly. Hell, even some on his own side have said that in order for this thing to keep costs down, they have to ration care, something he claimed was just fear-mongering. Yet he has stated that he won’t repeal it and start over or entertain ideas that limit key aspects of it. So much entertaining all ideas huh?
And if his plan is so great, why the hell is his administration granting so many waivers so companies can keep their current plans in place for their employees? I thought if someone liked their plan, they’d be able to keep it under his healthcare bill? This bill is bad and all the waivers they’re giving just prove it because, simply put, if it was good, these companies and unions wouldn’t need a waiver to protect themselves from it.
War on Terror
During the campaign, President Obama said that Afghanistan is a “war of necessity” and the war that needs to be on the forefront of the war on terror, not Iraq. Yet back in 2009 when Afghanistan was descending into chaos, he sat on a report from his top commander there urgently requesting upwards of 60,000 additional troops to help bring stability to the nation. What did the Commander-in-Chief do? He sat on it for four months before finally deciding to make a speech (surprise!) where he decided to slowly commit an additional 30,000 troops to operations in Afghanistan, below even the minimum number of 40,000 General Stanley McChrystal requested. If this is a war of necessity, you commit the troops faster than that. I know there is time required to mobilize that many troops and devise a strategy but four months is far too long. Hell, President Bush went from being president of a quiet country at peace on September 10, 2001, to a war time leader conducting operations halfway around the globe in less than a month.
Even with his commitment of additional troops there, he initially set a date for withdrawal: July 2011. As someone who has studied insurgencies and counterinsurgencies, I can tell you that setting dates on ceasing or drawing back operations will only embolden the enemy because they see that you are not fully committed to winning. This is especially true with these jihadists. They have been battling the West for centuries and they understand that it is a long, slow, drawn-out fight. To them, a year and a half is not a long time to just sit back and wait for us to pull back and eventually out before launching a large scale offensive against the new government, leading to a bloody civil war that will eventually put those who we booted from power back in control. I would be willing to bet President Obama has advisors that have told him this or at a minimum he’s read editorials that have stated similar arguments. Yet he doesn’t seem like he is budging from his position with the exception of now saying that July 2011 was a target date, not an end all, be all date.
I caught some coverage the other day of President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast talking about his “Christian faith” and how it has hurt him that people question his faith and the faith of the First Lady. He oversold the talk on his faith though which showed me he doesn’t believe what he actually believes. If he is truly a Christian, he’d turn the other cheek and not worry about what other people are saying instead of getting highly defensive about it. But let’s examine why people question his “Christian faith.” Could it be about his remarks about clinging to guns and religion? Could it be that he has talked about his Muslim faith? Or that he has said the Muslim call to prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth”? Or that his White House requested that Georgetown University cover up crosses while he gave a speech there in 2009?
Also, he sat for 20 years in the pews of “Rev.” Jeremiah Wright’s “church” listening to him spew nothing but hatred. I have yet to hear anything out of that man’s mouth that sounds even remotely Christian. When Wright’s sermons came to light during the campaign, President Obama said he really didn’t hear anything he had to say. Oh really? I’m pretty sure you don’t go to the same church for 20 years and not hear the shit that came out of Wright’s mouth. A logical continuance would be that President Obama agreed with what he said, otherwise why did he keep going for so many years? It just doesn’t fit.
With all this and more, it’s no wonder why many people question his faith. He’s given them every reason to. Personally, I think he’s an atheist and that’s fine by me. I don’t care. I just want him to be honest about it.
This one really hurts. He speaks in platitudes about the United States at his State of the Union but if you listen to just about every speech he’s ever made, especially those overseas, you’ll hear him doing nothing about apologizing for the United States. You’ll hear him condemning us for doing this or that, or being wasteful, or any number of things. I’m not even going to bother trying to provide links because there’s far too many. If he really thinks so highly of us, like he stated in his State of the Union, then why does he feel the need to always cut us down? Sure, we have done bad things but I like to think we’ve moved on from that and made amends the best we could.
He needs to realize that we are not the cause of the world’s problems. On the contrary, we’re the opposite of it. We are the reason why so much good has happened since we became a nation. We’ve developed technologies that have provided a better standard of living around the world, even in the poorest places. Our medical advancements and technology has saved countless lives and made lives better around the world. Our people give billions in charity every year that goes to help the less fortunate. We produce so much food that we’re able to help feed the world. Our manufacturing has provided cheap good worldwide (though now with excessive taxes and regulation much of that is moving overseas). During the two world wars, the Cold War, and various other conflicts throughout the 20th Century, we have been the arsenal of democracy, liberating millions from the clutches of tyranny, ensuring they are able to live free and prosper. We have done more good for the world than any other nation in history but yet he attacks the country that HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF constantly but then feigns to say how great we are. I just don’t believe it.
After the Tuscon shootings, President Obama called for civility. Again, just like everyone on the left, the lack of civility is only on one side: the right. This is another case where he proves to be disingenuous, especially after his remarks during the tax rate debate calling Republicans “hostage takers,” before the election calling on Hispanics to punish their enemies, telling his supporters that if they (Republicans) bring a knife to a fight, they’ll bring a gun, or during the campaign how he called on his supporters to go door to door and get in people’s faces. Those are very civil words aren’t they? The sad thing is that these aren’t even the tip of the iceberg. And while we’re on the topic of civility, why the hell is nobody on the left condemning this?
Regulations and Spending
Ever since his party took a beating in November, President Obama seems to have done a 180 on the size of government. He’s now calling for cutting out unnecessary regulations that hinder economic growth and cutting spending. Where was he the last two years? During those two years he did nothing but spend and regulate so you’ll excuse me if I feel that he is being extremely disingenuous here. Many in the mainstream media are again fawning over him and how Reaganesque or Kennedyesque he sounds. That’s funny because there President Obama and President Reagan are nothing alike. And as for President Kennedy, well watch this with the transcript here and this and tell me if any of what he says sounds like anything President Obama has been pushing for in his State of the Union or in a speech he gave to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce this week. He always says something that sounds good but none of it matches up with the beliefs of those whom he is trying to sell his ideas to. And if he wants to identify job killing regulations he need to look at his own healthcare bill. Why does he only worry about regulations after he’s already expanded government?
In addition to all of this, he called to cut spending after spending more than any other president for the time he’s been in office. In the same breath though he called for government investments. I don’t know about you but I’m pretty damn sure that government investment = more spending. If he was truly interested in cutting spending, he wouldn’t pledge to cap spending levels after he has increased spending. Rather he’d go back to lower spending levels because while those rates were bad, they are no where near the problem that the current spending levels are. Only that would be a true spending cut. He talks about all this stuff but he won’t go through with it. Or how about he starts cutting subsides to large corporations that the left already blasts for having huge profits like GE, which President Obama is now buddy-buddy with? If they’re making huge profits, why the hell do we need to subsidize them? He’s trying to look like he’s moving to the center like President Clinton supposedly did after the 1994 elections but it’s all a farce.
All of the points I’ve made here are but a few of the tons of examples of why I feel he is disingenuous. He says one thing and does another so it’s hard to truly believe what he says. Just keep all these examples in mind next time you hear him speech or push a new policy. Look beyond his words to what he’s said or pushed in the past. People don’t change this drastically this quickly.