The New Clarion

The New Clarion header image 2

The Audacity of BS

January 30th, 2010 by Myrhaf · 9 Comments · Uncategorized

People are on to Obama. They know he’s a liar. The Washington Times:

While Mr. Obama was bashing lobbyists during his State of the Union, his administration already had planned private briefings with powerful K Street lobbyists for the very next day. According to The Hill newspaper, the Obama Treasury Department invited lobbyists to “a series of conference calls with senior Obama administration officials to discuss key aspects of the State of the Union address.”

Senator Inhofe:

“I was thinking back during the first State of the Union Address by Bill Clinton and I thought, ‘This guy can say things that aren’t true with greater conviction than anyone I’ve ever seen.’ I honestly think that Obama is better.”

No question Obama is the better liar. Bill Clinton, con artist that he was, had some shred of decency in his soul that showed shame when he lied. Obama, who has lived in the far leftist bubble his entire life, has no trace of shame when he lies. He projects self-righteous condescension when he speaks. He believes he is, as an altruist-collectivist, morally superior to the rest of us. Remember his fantasies about doctors performing needless operations because they’ve been corrupted by greed? That’s what he thinks capitalism does to everyone except the philosopher-kings of the left. He believes he has a moral right to lie to Americans for their own good.

Moreover, postmodern philosophy tells Obama that there is no objective reality, there are only “narratives” informed by tribal differences. Obama believes his narrative is moral because he is not motivated by greed.

As good a liar as Obama is, he is not getting away with his lies because most Americans have a better understanding of reality than Obama. For those Americans who are not sure, there are plenty of sound thinkers on talk radio and the internet explaining how Obama is wrong. Leftists tell themselves they are being drowned out by the “right-wing noise machine,” but really it’s just the truth getting out. In a country with free speech, a statist cannot get away with so many outrageous lies.

I’m beginning to think Obama’s presidency is dead. It died on February 27, 2009, the day of the first Tea Parties, which came after Rick Santelli’s February 19 call for protests on CNBC. On that day Independents and Republicans joined to protest the big government policies of Obama-Reid-Pelosi. The Democrat Party leaders responded with smears.

Obama lost the American people. When the Democrats, in their astonishing arrogance, called the protesters racists, KKK, evil-mongers, a mob, and so on, they lost them forever. People don’t vote for a politician after he insults them.

The Democrats thought they could intimidate people away from the protests by demonizing the movement. They didn’t realize they were talking only to their base, and now that is all the support that remains.

This does not mean they will give up. When you believe morality is on your side, you don’t give up. They will try everything to pass their socialist agenda. With the help of their media, some of their lies will will succeed. It will be interesting to see, as failure mounts upon failure, what fresh hells desperation inspires on the left.

9 Comments so far ↓

  • madmax

    If Rick Santelli is the catalyst of this then that means that Ayn Rand is a factor as in that now famous outburst of his he proudly declared himself as a “Ayn Rander”. Rand’s influence is out there slowly spreading.

  • Grant

    I thought the same thing about BO’s ability to lie. Towards the beginning of the SOTU speech, about 5:30 in, when he was discussing American perseverance in regards to the bad economy, he said the following:

    “…one woman wrote to me and said: ‘we are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged’. It’s because of this spirit, this great decency and great strength, I have never been more hopeful about America’s future than I am tonight.” (cue the evening’s first applause)

    Immediately after that came out of his mouth, a look appeared on his face that, to me anyways, was terrifying. It looked like amusement, sneering resentment, and just raw, unvarnished hatred all rolled into one. I could almost literally hear the post script he would have liked to have added, but couldn’t:

    “… I am this hopeful because, according to my calculations, that decency and strength will allow the people to continue to put up with me just long enough into the future so that I can live a long and comfortable life – at their expense – and by the time they revolt, I’ll have died of natural causes.”

    It’s as if knowing that what he had really done was to make an admission, but because no one else realized it he will be able to keep going, was the private pleasure he was taking in making that statement.

    I think that Obama is someone who truly enjoys his ability to flout reality. I think he regards himself as uniquely endowed with a magical characteristic. In making that statement, he was able to achieve one thing (an insult) while appearing to be doing the complete opposite (a compliment), and when it worked, his facial expression revealed, for a moment, the true source of his self-respect; what he truly thinks of himself.

    I truly believe that this guy regards his ability to manipulate other people – to play upon their weaknesses, fear, and pretensions – as on par metaphysically with someone with an actual, productive skill.

  • Lauren


    Unfortunately, some doctors do perform procedures because of greed. Patients often aren’t aware of the costs if they have insurance, and insurance will pay for whatever they recommend. The answer to this is not socialism; it’s deregulation of the medical industry.

    I actually caught my dentist in a lie. He told me one day before a teeth cleaning that my teeth were fine, and the next day that I had 3 cavities? did i get them overnight?? I decided not to have them drilled. My teeth have been fine since.

  • Myrhaf

    Did Santelli pronounce her name right?

    Madmax, I’m convinced Ayn Rand is a factor. She’s changing the culture already. I know she changed me. I used to be a liberal more or less. Not an ideologue — I was more interested in comic books and Rock’n’Roll than politics — but your average welfare state idiot.

    John Hawkins became a conservative after reading Atlas Shrugged. Granted, as a conservative he has lots for us to disagree with, but the point is that he’s not a leftist because of reading Ayn Rand. How many more like him are there? More, I suspect, than the conservatives want people to know.

  • madmax

    Actually, I think what he said was “I’m an Ann Rander.” So he probably doesn’t know of the word “Objectivist” and he doesn’t know how to pronounce her name. Sigh. But still he was saying that Obama’s policies were “collectivist” and he is an “individualist.” That’s pretty impressive in its own right.

    I often wonder what the consequence would be if a truly famous person in the eyes of the popular culture were to be openly Objectivist. For example, imagine if Kobe Bryant or Peyton Manning were to be openly Objectivist and say how Ayn Rand’s philosophy helped make them the great success they were and also how they didn’t believe in self-sacrifice and some other basic O’ist stuff. They would be hated by many, but that in and of itself could push Objectivism along and advance its cultural spread by decades. We need to infiltrate the universities but a significant presence in the popular culture could be of enormous help. But it just might not be possible yet until some as yet unforeseen cultural breakthrough occurs.

  • rob sama

    Great analysis.

    I’m becoming convinces that Obama won’t run again in 2012. He’ll duck out like a coward like Dodd or LBJ. Except I’m sure he’ll make some snide remark about how people were too stupid to appreciate him, and the right wing noise machine poisoned his well.

  • Joseph Kellard


    Re: Bryant or Manning becoming, essentially, poster boys for Objectivism, I think you are spot on about the impact that would have on others ignorant of or mildly familiar with the philosophy. The closest we have to that kind of face, though, is BB&T’s John Allison–and we should be promoting him when the opportunity calls for it, and even when it doesn’t.

    Yes, we hear about various famous people who have read Ayn Rand’s books and express at least some agreement with her philosophy — from Angelina to Mark Cuban (owner of Dallas’ NBA team), but they’re not Objectivists. It’s good, certainly for the publicity, but not a concretization of where living as an Objectivist can lead.

  • madmax


    I absolutely agree about John Allison. But Allison is a mild mannered businessman. What I am really thinking of is a pop-culture icon. I guess if a guy like Donald Trump were to be a vocal and consistent Objectivist and give an Objectivist and laissez-faire critique of all things relating to business and the economy that would be a big step in the right direction. But outside of Allison, there is no true Objectivist businessman of any size.

    Regarding Mark Cuban and Angelina, its interesting to me that there exists this phenomenon of left of center celebs that pay lip service to Rand. I don’t understand why they do this as the Left has nothing to gain from Rand. Rand signals the end of their cultural dominance if she should gain any kind of significant influence. I can see a guy like Dennis Miller praising Rand but I don’t see why the leftist celebs do this.

    Lastly, just think of the difference that one high powered Hollywood director could make if he were a real Objectivist? Can you imagine if someone like James Cameron or Ridley Scott or Oliver Stone were O’ists instead of far-Leftists? Picture what an O’ist version of Avatar could mean for our culture. The thing is I don’t think that is possible just yet but a Hall-of-Fame Quarterback injecting O’ism into his interviews where appropriate is.

  • Myrhaf

    I’ve heard of a many celebrities over the years who were fans of Ayn Rand or her novels. Cal Ripken, Martina Navratilova, Jerry Lewis, Penn and Teller come to mind. Also there was a third baseman for the Phillies, but I forgot his name. None of these was a committed Objectivist, however. Maybe Penn and Teller come the closest.