I do not like to throw around a charge of mendacity without good reason particularly after listening to the mainstream media and liberal blogosphere accuse Bush of this all day long. But the more I listen to what comes out of this administration and the actions they take it is getting harder to hold my fire.
Take for example the brouhaha over the immigration law that hasn’t even gone into effect yet in Arizona. From the start the administration has falsely portrayed the law as racial profiling, but when asked if they had actually read the ten page law, both Attorney General Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano said they had not. How do people in such senior positions in any administration make such a bold claim without reading what they are opposing? It begs the question, do they know they are talking about?
The federal government has gone forward and is suing Arizona over the law claiming that it preempts federal law. But here are some interesting questions:
- If the Arizona law preempts federal law and that is a bad thing, why does the federal government not sue San Francisco and other cities who have openly professed that they are Sanctuary Cities and immigration law will not be enforced therein?
- A recent news report is that there is a law on the books in Rhode Island that is virtually identical to the law in Arizona and it has withstood judicial challenge? Why isn’t the federal government suing Rhode Island?
- The thrust of the federal government’s pique with the Arizona law is their claim that it is discriminatory. But this same administration has just ordered that a case be dropped against a radical hate group, the Black Panthers, for putting armed thugs outside a polling place in Philadelphia on Election Day in 2008. According to six career Civil Rights attorneys in the Justice Department, the case was a slam dunk and they had already gotten a default judgment from the court, but this administration chose to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Justice Department’s claim is that the facts did not fit the law. Anyone who has seen the video of the incident knows that is a bald faced lie. Is this administration for discrimination or against it?
The latest move by this administration against the rest of us is the recess appointment of Donald Berwick as the head of Medicare. The lie in this case, is that the Republicans were stalling the appointment for “political purposes.” Now other presidents have used recess appointments. Both Clinton and Bush used them many times, however it was typically when they could not get the Senate to act on their nominee. In this case, Max Baucus (D – MT), had not even scheduled hearings and eleven weeks after the nomination, the administration had not yet completed the nominating paperwork. So was this action taken because of inaction on the part of the Senate or was the administration lying because they really didn’t want a public debate on Dr. Berwick?
Dr. Berwick has said he is, “Romantic about the National Health Service,” of Britain. For all the false claims by the Obama Administration that if you are happy with your current health insurance you will be able to keep it, they stealthily appoint a socialized medicine disciple. Dr. Berwick has also famously said:
“The decision is not whether or not we will ration care – the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”
Let’s see, the Obama Administration appoints Dr. Berwick head of Medicare. Medicare is the health care program for the elderly. Dr. Berwick is plain about health care rationing and suggests the way to do it is with our eyes open. While the term “death panel” may have been used by Sarah Palin partially for its shock value to drive home her point, changing the name to a “rationing” panel would make it different in what way?
Here is the key distinction. In the hands of the individual and their family, they can decide what kind of care they want to provide their loved ones. They can decide when enough is enough or whether to press on. In a free market, insurance policies would be true insurance not medical payment plans. But regardless you would have the liberty to decide. In this administration’s world, some bureaucrat makes the decision and after they have driven all the alternatives out of business, other than those available to the wealthy, you will have no choice but to succumb to the will of Big Brother.
We are currently surrounded by news of massive government failures in regulation in the areas of finance and the oil industry and we are to believe that they will be superb in running one-sixth of the economy. Do you believe the lies?
