Calling someone a liar is a strong statement. However, when it comes to Obama, he provides the clear and convincing evidence himself. Virtually everyone is aware of the interview he gave to Bill O’ Reilly of Fox News prior to the Super Bowl. It’s the most talked about interview in a long, long time. You can be sure that both parties knew this coming in and both had an agenda. O’ Reilly is the king of evening opinion news so he wasn’t going to do anything to jeopardize that by calling out the President and cornering him with tough questions. He said as much as on his show Monday evening when discussing his target audience in that time slot prior to such a big event as the Super Bowl. No surprises here.

There were also no surprises from the Obama side. His handlers no doubt spent extra time in prepping him for the interview and ensuring that he answered the questions with the new 2012 re-election talking points. Primarily that is to say that he wishes to visibly appear to be more centrist. This is where he’s caught lying. He said “no” when O’Reilly asked him if he supported redistribution of wealth. I won’t waste my time linking to his interview as you can find it everywhere. What I will link to are the various times in which Obama has made it clear he no doubt supports socialism and redistribution of wealth. He still can’t admit to it because it’s politically toxic. One would think he would get much more respect if he simply came clean like Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont who openly admits to being a socialist. Then he wouldn’t have to keep up this charade of tap-dancing around questions about his true intentions, but the pollsters tell him he simply can’t go there if he wants to get the vote of the people who will have to cough up the money to redistribute.

Ok, on to the evidence. Actually, we can start  with yesterday when he appeared in front of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He stated that in exchange for lower tax rates, corporations have to share those profits with the workers. Who wouldn’t want that? That’s why workers are in the game, to make more money. Just as the corporate board has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders to maximize profits in return for their investment. The problem comes in when government dictates what any company or corporation or even industry MUST do with its revenue. That is socialism.

Watch the entire video of his speech if you wish, or simply go to about the 25:30 mark to hear these specific comments regarding profits.

Of course, there is the most famous of all when Obama ran into Joe the Plumber on the campaign trail. Go to about the 4:40 mark for his infamous quote.

Still not convinced? Let’s go back even farther. Back to when Obama was just a State Senator from Illinois. He did an interview in 2001 with Chicago public radio. He again specifically states “redistributive change”. Listen for yourself.

Then there was the debate with Hillary Clinton when discussing capital gains taxes, he was considering raising it out of a “purposes of fairness”.

Are you unhappy with the high energy costs we have today? Not your President. He wants them. He wants cap-and-trade. He wants everything “green”. He wants to force industry to raise rates to force us to change our lifestyle so we convert to his agenda. Watch and see.

The point of all this is to illustrate that the one thing Obama said during the O’Reilly interview that was true was when he said he was still the same old guy. Absolutely true. He hasn’t changed at all. And you can watch and listen to his words proving it. It’s only today that he lies about what he is so he can get re-elected. The fact is that he is a socialist. Remember, socialist is not a dirty word. It’s simply an economic model that a government pursues. It always fails, but nonetheless it is simply a strategy that Obama believes in. Wealth redistribution is a key component of socialism. We are now in for a 21 month blitz of bait-and-switch. Obama cannot allow himself to be characterized as a socialist despite being one and his own words prove it.

Those that know me or have read this blog know I don’t chase blog traffic. But I believe getting the word out about the true intentions of Obama is vital. Particularly the audio clip from Chicago radio that many haven’t heard. Link to it or simply go to YouTube and get it yourself and post it. Do whatever you can to make sure we offset what Obama will attempt prior to 2012, and that is to deny the proven fact that he is a socialist and does indeed support wealth redistribution. He’s a liar pure and simple.


8 thoughts on “Obama leaves no doubt he’s a liar

  1. I have always held back from calling Barack Obama a socialist, but as I see more and more of his agenda and listen to what the man has said, the more I am convinced that is exactly what he is. Even more troubling is his air of superiority, that he thinks he knows what is best for the American people. He is more than willing to place an extra burden on hard hit families by raising the price they pay for electricity and heating oil, not to mention the price of oil and gasoline. He thinks he can force us to change to his green agenda and has no problem with the costs, as he feels it is the right thing to do. I would submit that the changes he wants to make are going to be much more difficult for the average American citizen to manage than it will be for someone like him, who has never worked a day in his life, yet seems to enjoy a vast amount of wealth.

  2. As I touched on, I believe there is a stigma attached to the word “socialism”. It is not a sinister attempt to label someone something nefarious, rather it simply identifies their belief in a certain economic system. Fact is, socialism requires wealth redistribution as a centerpiece. I don’t even consider it an opinion when I call Obama a socialist. Rather, it is simply an observation of what he says and does, and his words and deeds leave no doubt that he is indeed a socialist. However, the stigma attached to the word equates it to something on the order of a “nazi”. This is only because most people don’t understand the true meaning of it. “Nazi” immediately brings to mind Hitler and genocide. But, the National Socialist Party is entirely separate from the practice of socialism despite whatever similar methodology Hitler employed. In other words, I would never equate someone who is a socialist as a mass murderer, and I make no such implication when it comes to Obama. He simply believes in a failed model of economics.

    Glad to see you getting back out and about Larry.

  3. Oh, and by the way, did I mention he’s a liar? Sorry if that makes some people uncomfortable, but when you can hear him say it in his own words, it’s indefensible.

  4. Hello Mr. Jackson,
    You said, “The problem comes in when government dictates what any company or corporation or even industry MUST do with its revenue.” Out of curiosity, do you have a blog about the $700 billion corporate bailout proposal during the Bush administration that “may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency”? That is tax payer money that has not helped those that are unemployed or have lost their homes. How is it OK to take the money of the hard working citizens of this country (e.g. those who DID NOT gamble their money), remove their medical and retirement benefits, yet it is suddenly labeled as something evil to get that money back to the people? If you or I started a business and took financial risks that caused that business to fail, no one would bail us out. Why should failed CEOs be rewarded with multimillion-dollar bailouts of taxpayer money for their failure? Do you not see a problem with this?

  5. First off, I’m not Mr. Jackson, he is a commenter on this post. To answer your curiosity, if you’re thinking this is an apologist blog for Bush or the Republican party, you’re mistaken. You need to read some of my other posts. I was 100% against any bailouts in which Bush and Obama both participated. This was also not taxpayer money. It was simply more accrued debt. Again, I don’t support any form of bailouts. What Obama did with the auto companies is unethical at a minimum. The bondholders and shareholders paid the price to reward the unions and those same CEO’s you speak of. One of the points I raised in the post was Obama dictating to corporations on what they have to do with their money. Government has no place in doing this. They shouldn’t pick winners and losers and they shouldn’t control what any business does with it’s revenue. That’s why we have boards responsible to their shareholders. That’s why the market should decide which companies are responsible members of our communities. You mentioned getting the money back to the people. How about never taking it to begin with? To your last question, I see a whole multitude of problems with administrations both Republican or Democrat. We did not get to where we are today by the actions of just one side. But Obama is the current occupant, so that is where my focus is today.

  6. The list of untrue statements from Obama is a lenghty one. If you include exaggerations, half-truths, and willful omissions, it would take a very, very long time to keep track of all of them. As more moderates and independents catch on it will harm his reelection chances. Integrity still matters in this country.

  7. We both know politicians from both sides of the aisle lie. It’s not so often that we can trap them using their own words so as to leave no doubt. Thanks for checking in.

Comments are now closed.