Opportunities repeatedly have been overlooked by the media and even by many blog news sites to more properly assess the true motivations of President Barack Hussein Obama, based on his character, policies, behavior and public mien. The scandal that has erupted over MIT economics professor Jonathan Grub’s remarks during a panel discussion about the machinations behind getting Obamacare drafted, and then enacted in Congress and signed by Obama, can serve as an important guide to what Obama is “all about.” Judicial Watch focuses on the “transparent” contempt Gruber has for Americans:
The esteemed college professor who served as one of Obamacare's key architects has admitted that a "lack of transparency" helped the administration pass the disastrous healthcare law, which is facing a number of legal challenges.
It's a scandalous confession for an administration that has repeatedly vowed to be the most transparent in history. The information comes straight from Jonathan Gruber, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) economist who served as a technical consultant to the Obama administration during the Affordable Care Act's (Obamacare) design. Gruber was recorded during a panel and the video recently surfaced and has been making the rounds on the internet.
"This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes," Gruber says. "If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay, so it's written to do that. In terms of risk rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in - you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed... Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass..." (Italics mine)
Gruber’s bragging – and, incidentally baring his decrepit, rotten soul about how he helped to push through the intentionally deceitful ACA – serves as an overture to an assessment of Obama’s own soul. Let us count the ways Obama has been spared – nay, let off the hook – by contemporary assessments of his character, his motives, and his means and ends. He has been called these things, even by his own supporters, by critics hesitant to pass the final judgment on him:
Short-sighted, clueless, wrong-headed, dumb, inexperienced, ineffectively pragmatic, delusional, negligent, an impotent moral relativist, out-maneuvered by pros, reckless, feckless, prodigal, failed, a narcissist, cold, glib, out of touch, opaque, grasping, dismissive, a well-intentioned idealist, amateurish, distracted, tactless, fumbling, incompetent, arrogant, misunderstood, more sinned against than sinning, ham-fisted, heartless, indelicate, manipulative, manipulated, fraud, Putin’s poodle, China’s patsy, racist, lackadaisical, Anglophobic, power-luster, veteran of verisimilitude, doyen of dissimilation, abusive, self-defeating, self-wounding ….
In describing the character of Obama one could compile a veritable Roget’s International Thesaurus of terms that would apply exclusively to Obama. It would contain no antonyms. Let’s mention some of his more notorious legislative and executive orders since he assumed office in 2009. To date, the White House lists nearly ninety pages of Acts he has signed, ten to a page. To date, he has issued twenty pages of executive orders, also ten to a page.
“Cash for Clunkers.” (His very first Executive Order.)
The subsidizing of Solyndra and other failed companies.
Delaying approval of the Keystone Pipeline. The attack on coal and the one-sided “pact” agreed on with the Chinese dictatorship to reduce “greenhouse emissions” founded on a bogus “climate change” and environmentalist ideology.
Using the IRS to punish or silence organizations that oppose his policies.
The continued profligacy of TARP, enacted under George W. Bush’s administration.
His denigration of the Constitution and the Founders.
The removal of all mentions of Islam and Muslims from FBI counter-terrorism training materials. Many police departments have followed suit, under pressure from CAIR and other Muslim advocacy groups.
“Fast and Furious.” Retaining and supporting a lawless and perjured Attorney General, Eric Holder.
The lawless shenanigans of Kathleen Sebelius, the former and disgraced HHS Secretary.
Holder’s Justice Department data mining and monitoring of journalists.
Obama’s core affinity with Islam and his venomous hatred of Israel.
Benghazi and Hillary Clinton.
The deliberate alienation of our former allies.
His desire to regulate the Internet, and speech, especially political speech, and most especially the speech of those who are critical of Islam, Muslims, and that ideology of totalitarianism.
His 2012 United Nations address. “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”
His Cairo speech of 2009.
His unconstitutional declaration of war against Libya. HIs supplying “moderate” jihadists with arms and money in Syria.
His amnesty plans for thousands of illegal aliens.
His policy of abetting the invasion of this country by Muslims.
His refusal to close the U.S.-Mexican border against an orchestrated invasion of this country by illegals and terrorists.
His habitual bypassing of Congress using Executive Privilege to enact the laws of his preference.
His willingness to allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons.
His deliberate humiliation of the U.S. in bowing to the obese head savage in Saudi Arabia, his subservience to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, and the deference he has paid to other autocrats, such as Hugo Chavez.
His conscious lies, equivocations, and obfuscations.
Need I go on? See this list, published July 2013,by Natural News, for more of Obama’s depredations. The author notes:
However, it's important to note that many of these are not "scandals" in the typical sense, but rather the machinations of an imperial president who seeks to "rule" over his "subjects," without their consent.
Don't expect Obama to suddenly grow a conscience and constrain himself, meaning this list is destined to grow larger.
The list of criminal commissions by Obama together with his numerous scandals is longer than that which our Founders itemized in the Declaration of Independence against George the Third.
My assessment of Obama is that he is evil incarnate. He hates this country and everything about it. He hates Americans, especially if they’re white. He is self-programmed to destroy as much of the country it is in his power to. There is virtually nothing that he has done since occupying the White House that isn’t meant to advance his agenda. I would go so far as to say that even his notorious golfing episodes and inexplicable and unexplained absences during major crises are part and parcel of that agenda. It’s his way of giving the country his middle finger. That, and his multi-million dollar vacations to Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard and beyond. He flaunts his taxpayer-paid “life style” like Miley Cyrus flaunts her backside to cheapen sex. Obama’s purpose is to cheapen the country and diminish the stature of America, not only in the world’s eyes, but in the eyes of his “fellow” Americans.
No one seems to be willing to pass the ultimate, most damning judgment on Obama: That he is evil.
What other conclusion can one reasonably reach?
That is as transparently obvious as a photo of Obama in his golf togs. What other American president, other than FDR, has launched a broad-based attack on this country – on the Constitution, on Americans, on our liberties, on individual rights, on our property and wealth, on our freedom, than Barack Obama, with a consistent, demonstrable hostility for everything this country is and stands for? But even FDR, for all his grave faults, did not set out to destroy this country as Obama has and will continue to for the next two years.
Transparency? Obama’s administration was ballyhooed to be the “most open and transparent” in American history. Richard Epstein noted, in his Foreign Policy article of May 2013, “The only thing transparent about the White House is its perverse penchant for secrecy.”:
The very president who has pledged himself to the most open and transparent administration ever is now perceived on all sides of the political spectrum as a secretive soul who skulks about in the shadows, so sure of his own moral rectitude that he thinks that it is all right to ignore the procedural safeguards that the U.S. Constitution wisely puts in the path of less wise and omniscient presidents. Long ago, James Madison warned in Federalist No. 10 that the Constitution had to be rigged for bad times because it is in the nature of politics that "Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." Madison's time has come.
Arnold Ahlert, in his November 14th FrontPage article on a federally (or taxpayer) funded project to monitor politically undesirable tweets on Twitter, wrote:
Tellingly, this story has reached critical mass at the same time President Obama revealed he is intent on regulating the Internet, reclassifying it as a utility in order to bring it under the increasingly tighter yoke of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). “To put these protections in place, I’m asking the FCC to reclassify internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act,” Obama said in a statement released Nov. 10. “In plain English, I’m asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life.”
True. But the point is that Obama wants to control the activities of most Americans in their everyday lives. He wants to reduce Americans to the plight of Venezuelans under thug-enforced socialism, standing in line for basic necessities they once took for granted, distributed by the thugs.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary about Obama’s “good intentions,” the New York Times treats his penchant for secrecy as though it were a juvenile prank. Julie Hirschfeld Davis, in her August 2014 article, “Behind Closed Doors, Obama Crafts Executive Actions.”
When President Obama announced in June that he planned to bypass congressional gridlock and overhaul the nation’s immigration system on his own, he did so in a most public way: a speech in the White House Rose Garden.
Since then, the process of drafting what will likely be the only significant immigration changes of his presidency — and his most consequential use of executive power — has been conducted almost entirely behind closed doors, where lobbyists and interest groups invited to the White House are making their cases out of public view.
Mr. Obama’s increasingly expansive appetite for the use of unilateral action on issues including immigration, tax policy and gay rights has emboldened activists and businesses to flock to the administration with their policy wish lists.
Since the president first announced his intention to use his “pen and phone” to advance his agenda during his State of the Union address in January, White House officials have held weekly meetings to compile ideas from inside and outside the administration.
In some cases, the public has gotten a glimpse of the process, such as during a summit meeting on working families in June. More often, though, the talks have occurred behind the scenes. Administration officials have convened more than 20 so-called listening sessions this summer alone on executive options for revising immigration policy, a White House official said, declining to discuss the sessions in detail because the conversations were private. (Emphasis mine.)
Private?? So much for transparency. This is more Jonathan Gruber stand-up comic material.
“The president has been clear that he will use all of the tools at his disposal, working with Congress where they are willing but also taking action on his own where they aren’t, to expand opportunity for all Americans and help more families share in our economy’s continued progress,” said Jennifer Friedman, a White House spokeswoman.
Sounds like by-the-book Progressivism. The Progressive agenda to command the dissolution of America, by pen and phone. Obstructions to his will are regarded by Obama as inconvenient and unfair. And probably racist. He will not approve the Keystone Pipeline. He wants to kill coal. He wants everyone to be dependent on his whim and on government largesse.
I had planned to end this column by presenting a scenario in which the reader is witness to the horrors committed by Islam and ISIS in the Mideast, and asking the reader to decide whether he was seeing evil at work, Islam in its naked essence, an Islam with which, as I noted above, Obama has a proven affinity.
But then I thought of something better, something that would more clearly drive home my point that Obama is evil. It is a short speech from Ayn Rand’s novel, The Fountainhead.
“Listen, what's the most horrible experience you can imagine? To me—it's being left, unarmed, in a sealed cell with a drooling beast of prey or a maniac who's had some disease that's eaten his brain out. You'd have nothing then but your voice—your voice and your thought. You'd scream to that creature why it should not touch you, you'd have the most eloquent words, the unanswerable words, you'd become the vessel of the absolute truth. And you'd see living eyes watching you and you'd know that the thing can't hear you, that it can't be reached, not reached, not in any way, yet it's breathing and moving there before you with a purpose of its own. That's horror. Well, that's what's hanging over the world, prowling somewhere through mankind, that same thing, something closed, mindless, utterly wanton, but something with an aim and a cunning of its own.”*
Barack Obama doesn’t merely know something about that drooling beast.
He is that drooling beast.
*The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand. 1943. Bobbs-Merrill: Indianapolis-New York. pp. 352-353.