Did Obama Lie?

A few years ago, Democrats succeeded in branding George Bush a liar.

But, when George Bush claimed that Saddam had WMDs, was he really lying? Or was he misinformed?

If you believe that Bush knew that there were no WMDs, and that he was intending to deceive the public, then you can say that he was lying.

If he was misinformed, and if he held the same misinformed belief that most Congressional Democrats also held, then he was not lying.

If the latter is true, then the Democrats and their supporters were lying when they said that Bush lied. Hmm.

Give them credit for their success. As any propaganda minister will tell you, the more you repeat a lie the more it gets accepted as gospel truth.

Now, will the press and the pundits and the political class apply the same standards to President Obama?

When Obama was trying to sell his stimulus bill in 2009, he declared that the money would be used for “shovel-ready projects.” The phrase was repeated so often, by so many of the bill’s supporters, that it became the bill's mantra.

This Sunday the New York Times Magazine, in an extensive and exhaustive report on Obama’s “education,” will report that: “He realized too late that 'there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects' when it comes to public works.” Link here.

Now he tells us. Does this mean that Obama was lying when he said that all of these infrastructure projects were ready to go, waiting for a little monetary stimulus?

Did Obama know that his stimulus bill was not going to rebuild America’s decaying infrastructure?

Did he lie or was he misinformed?

The difference lies in his intention. But how to you know what was in his mind? We aren’t mind readers, after all.

If Obama did not know the truth about shovel-ready projects, then he did not know what was in the stimulus bill. I imagine that that is a possibility, albeit a remote one.

In fact, pro-Obama commentators noted at the time that there was very little spending for shovel-ready projects. Take the contemporaneous discussion between Chris Matthews and Jim Cramer in late January, 2009. Link here.

They were remarking, in surprised tones, that of the approximately $800 billion in stimulus spending, only three or so percent of the money was dedicated to infrastructure projects… to bridges, tunnels, roads, and other public construction projects.

That makes it far less likely that Obama did not know. But, if Obama also knew the truth, why would he have sold the bill, and risked his prestige, on an outright lie?

Did he imagine that once the economy recovered, no one would much care? Or, is he merely a creature of political expediency?

Surely, Obama should give thanks that no one is judging him according to the standards that were used to label George Bush a liar.

I am also compelled to note that the Times article is entitled: “The Education of President Obama."

Happily, this title echoes a theme that I posted about yesterday. The best defense the Times can find for Obama’s first two years is to say that he is receiving an education in the White House.

If so, it is saying that he is teachable, but that he is not coachable.

This is hardly encouraging.

It’s like a person who has been chosen to play for a championship, in golf perhaps. Unfortunately, that he does not really know how to play the game.

As he ends a predictably bad first nine holes, his defenders try to console us with the thought that he has been receiving an education in golf, thus, that he is learning to play the game.

As Bob Schieffer told David Axelrod last Sunday, on a different issue: “… is that the best you can do?”