Obama Breaks the First Rule of Lying Believably

Godfather Politics ^ | May 24, 2012 | Tad Cronn

[yoe]

The GOP has been “bamboozling” Americans and running up “wild debts,” the president told an audience in Denver this week.

If you’re going to be a liar in a political campaign and get away with it, there are some ground rules that must be followed.

Now it’s true that if you repeat a lie three times in public, it generally sticks. Especially if you have the help of sycophantic media to trumpet your lie far and wide, comment on what it means to the world, and so forth.

Wording is also important, particularly phrased in the form of a question, such as the ever-popular, “So, senator, is it true you’ve stopped beating your wife?” No matter the answer, your victim is fixed like a bug on a pin.

President Obama’s campaign is skilled at these tactics.

But it seems that Obama and his teleprompter have forgotten another basic rule of successful lying: The lie must be believable.

I think this is the blind spot that may do in the Obama campaign. Three years into his presidency, and while asking for a second term, Obama is still blaming Republicans for our massive debt. Without facts on his side, he expects voters to believe it just because he said it.

For a lie to be believable, it has to stick close to the truth. It is true that the Bush Administration ran up a hefty tab on its own, but most people are capable of remembering that Bush had to deal with a profligate Democrat Congress that carried itself over into Obama’s regime. Even with the House going to the GOP in midterm elections, Obama still has the Senate and considerable pull in the House.

All the programs Obama points to as his great achievements — particularly the failed trillion-dollar stimulus and health care — happened right out of the gate, under a Democrat House and Senate.

It’s also the time when our country’s deficit bloomed like some giant alien ficus out to devour Tokyo.

Yet, it’s precisely the time period the Obama Administration doesn’t want you to count. It was the end of fiscal 2009, therefore in the official White House version of the universe, all that spending by Obama and the Democratic Party was actually being done by President Bush, who by that time was grilling steaks back at the ranch and enjoying retirement.

Any look at the numbers reveals Obama’s corrosive influence on our debts. The 2009 budget deficit was triple 2008′s. The deficit went from 3.1 percent of GDP in 2008 to 9.9 percent in 2009.

Now then, who was president?

Obama has also been telling his audiences that he signed into law more than $2 trillion in spending cuts. Those “cuts” he refers to were mostly of the Washington sort: Instead of raising a program’s budget by $12 billion, you only raise it $10 billion and voila! You’ve “cut” $2 billion.

That sort of math wouldn’t fly in most classrooms.

The other side of that funky equation is the beyond-rosy budget and economic projections used by the Obama Administration, such as the ridiculous guesstimate of 6.26 percent GDP growth for 2012, instead of the 1 to 2 percent we’re currently living through.

The 2010 budget had predicted a cut in the deficit to $533 billion by 2013. Each year, that estimate has grown to the current $912 billion projection. Given the current White House’s love of “fun with numbers,” it’s a safe bet that the reality will be at least double that, perhaps triple or more — not that you’ll ever see it in the papers.

Obama has overseen a more than $4.2 trillion increase in the national debt. That’s more than all presidents from Washington up to the first President Bush — combined.

With such dismal failure to reign in spending, it’s probably no wonder Obama feels he has to lie.

But it’s such a huge lie, it’s no wonder people are seeing through it.

[Kickass Conservative]

I remember Bush Campaigning for the Medicare Drug Benefit for “poor” Seniors. The Democrats insisted it cover everyone, and then the ridiculous “donut hole” compromise got put in to the Legislation as some sort of Bipartisan crapola.

The Bush v Gore Debate where the poor Old Lady showed up and said she had to collect aluminum cans to buy her Medicine did the trick for the Bill, despite the fact that the poor Old Lady was a Teamster Retiree with a Millionaire Son.

As a dedicated Democrat, she became the Poster Child for Government largess, whether you could afford the Drugs yourself or not. Another pathetic spectacle like Ms. Fluke.

[Beagle8U]

Well, there was also 911.

[Noob1999]

Another huge distortion is TARP.

Yes, the loans caused cash outlays at the tail end of Bush, so they get caught in the detail as 2009 “expenditures” according to Zer0 bogamath. So that would mean that the repayment of all those loans in fiscal 2010 and 2011 are probably counted as either income, or negative spending in Zer0 bogamath, distorting his stats by over what was it $900 billion???

[Kozak]

The deficit DOUBLED after Pelosi et al took over congress in 08.

[Kickass Conservative]

Having a Constitutionally Limited Government is my dream.

Now that one half of the Population supports the other half, my dream will never be realized. The most we can hope for is a Balanced Budget, but that would require that the National Debt be paid off so we aren’t spending 25% of the Budget on Interest Payments. It will never happen.

Might was well wish that Gravity won’t be an issue when you drive off a cliff. We will never see Governmental Fiscal Responsibility in our Lifetimes, never.

[douginthearmy]

All of this is well and good but there's one thing the Republicans never mention and they need to make it a part of a national campaing ala 1994. For every single republican overspending the democrats proposed greater spending and fought the republicans tooth and nail to get as much spending as possible. Behind every republican dollar in debt there is a democrat demanding that he spend 2 or 3 dollars.

These feckless whimps on the Sunday shows need to get in their opponents face and poke them in the chest and DEMAND, name a single budget in the last 30 years that the democrats proposed less spending than republicans. It has never happened.

[TigersEye]

"That devil Bush made me spend the money!"

[Soul of the South]

Plus Mr. Bush only cast 12 vetoes during his 8 years in office. Through 2006 he signed every spending bill. TARP, passed under Bush, has been a giant slush fund for Obama.

[snowsislander]

Another huge distortion is TARP.

Yes, the loans caused cash outlays at the tail end of Bush, so they get caught in the detail as 2009 “expenditures” according to Zer0 bogamath. So that would mean that the repayment of all those loans in fiscal 2010 and 2011 are probably counted as either income, or negative spending in Zer0 bogamath, distorting his stats by over what was it $900 billion???

Big BTTT.

I haven't seen anything on the disposition of the repayments and I strongly suspect that indeed they were counted as income.

Certainly I bet that the sweeteners thrown in were counted as income: the Bush Administration insisted on receiving warrants that ended up being worth a pretty penny. From the most recent Special Inspector General's TARP quarterly report: As of March 31, 2012, the combined proceeds from Treasury’s public and private warrant auctions totaled $5.4 billion.

(Report is at http://www.sigtarp.gov/Quarterly%20Reports/April_25_2012_Report_to_Congress.pdf; the quote is from page 97.)

Of course, it looks like the Kenyan Clown's administration has managed to even screw this up; from the report, it appears that recently (circa November 2011) a "new method" for disposing of these warrants has been created that guarantees that the federal government won't receive the full profits but instead will sell these warrants back on the cheap.

[Eye of Unk]

I vaguely recall it may have originated with Stalin and I cannot remember the exact words but in the Communist ideology if you repeat the lies enough times the people will eventually believe them.

I belive Obama was taught this very same method and he believes that everyone will just give up if he feeds them enough lies, well it has worked with the birthers to a large extent.

every time a birther thread arises a troll introduces a lie, repeats it in post after post until the whole thread gives up trying to stop him.

[Terry Mross]

I think if W had learned the definition of the word “veto” he might have spent less.

[RipSawyer]

You just don’t understand how it works, I used to be confused too but then one day back in the seventies I was reading the comics in the Sunday paper. There was one called “Hollyhock” which was the name of the little girl in the strip. Hollyhock was listening to a politician promising everything imaginable and when he asked if there were any questions she replied, “Yes, how do you intend to pay for all that.” He replied that it was very simple, “We have amassed a huge DEFICIT, why not just spend some of that?”
Of course once you have spent the deficit you can announce that you have CUT the deficit.

[yoe]

Hi mate, it goes....,"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.... Dr. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's minister of propaganda..Obama's election propaganda worked like that in 2007-8 and is right on target this election year. Obama has master propagandists working for him 24/7.