Get PJ Media on your Apple

Ed Driscoll

Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word

November 9th, 2013 - 4:26 pm

On Thursday night, the president sat down in front the most sympathetic television journalist* he could find, to profess to be “sorry” for knowingly being a serial liar to the American people since taking office. Fallout from that interview is still being measured, but here are some of the initial results from talk radio and the Blogosphere. First up, sitting in for Hugh Hewitt yesterday, Carol Platt Liebau, who knew Mr. Obama from their days on the Harvard Law Review, interviewed NBC’s Chuck Todd on how he landed the interview with the president, and what surprised him the most about Mr. Obama’s faux-apology:

CPL: Chuck, just closing out, we’ve got about 40 seconds left, I mean, were you surprised that the President didn’t just flat-out apologize like Lanny Davis and a bunch of others have suggested he should, instead of sort of giving a lawyerly apology, a carefully, you could see it was carefully worded. Were you surprised?

CT: Look, I thought it was going to happen right of the top. So I was surprised that it didn’t come until the second or, I think it was my second question, the first follow up. But you know, who knows how he thought about it, about how it should come out, how it should look? So, but I will admit, I thought it was going to come right off the top.

CPL: Yeah.

CT: But it didn’t, so you know, it would have been shame on me if I didn’t ask for one.

CPL: Well you did, and that was great. So finally, and just briefly, the President has mentioned that he feels badly and he’s working to fix these problems. What, in your view, is it that he can actually do? I mean, is there a legal authority that’s actually going to allow him to do anything meaningful? We’ve got about 25 seconds.

CT: Well, I don’t know. They’re trying to see if they can do it without Congress. They don’t want to go through Congress.

CPL: Yeah, but what kind of regulations can you do at this point?

CT: So, well, it has to do, honestly, they don’t know, yet. They’re negotiating with, I just did a bunch of reporting for this tonight. They’re negotiating with the, you know, you basically have three entities you have to deal with here – the state insurance commissioners, for the state by state issues, the insurance companies, plus the federal, their own federal regulation. I think what they’re trying to come up with is can they basically do regulations that would allow, let’s say you got a cancellation notice, you can’t have the policy you like, but maybe they can get the insurance companies and the regulators to agree well, you know what? If you want to keep that policy, you can renew it through 2014.

As Allahpundit noted at Hot Air, Mr. Obama isn’t really sorry for wrecking the insurance market:

He goes on and on and on from [his initial faux-pology to then boast] about how much “better” the new plans on the exchanges are. And you know what he means by that: “Better” = more comprehensive, period. Cost and access to a sizable provider network are almost entirely irrelevant to the calculus. No one seriously believes that, including him, but he needs to pretend in order to justify pushing healthy people into more expensive coverage. Comprehensiveness is mainly just the excuse to gouge them for higher premiums. He’s not sorry at all that people’s plans are being canceled.

“You know, he does not believe he lied on this,” NBC’s Todd added during his interview with Liebau. As John Nolte writes in response at Big Journalism:

If Obama has convinced himself he didn’t lie, that borders on pathological. We now know that as far back as 2010 the president knew eight to nine million people would lose their health insurance. We have him on video admitting to that:

The 8 to 9 million people you refer to that might have to change their coverage — keep in mind out of the 300 million Americans that we are talking about — would be folks who the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office,  estimates would find the deal in the exchange better. Would be a better deal. So, yes, they would change coverage because they got more choice and competition.

The key phrase is Obama admitting that those 8 or 9 million “might have to change their coverage.” And that video is the smoking gun equivalent of finding video of President George W. Bush admitting he knew all along that Iraq had no WMD.

And yet, straight through the 2012 election, Obama continued his campaign to reassure the American people that they could keep their insurance. Period.

And are still claiming on the White House Website:

On the other hand, at Mediaite, Noah Rothman writes that “Obama Burns Media Supporters with Apology.” There’s too much to quote from Rothman’s piece, which notes that the New York Times, juicebox mafioso Ezra Klein (and by extension, presumably the rest of the JournoList), and others who support the eventual goal of what is Orwellianly described as single-payer healthcare** are being made fools of by the president in his attempt to salvage his ever-diminishing reputation, and protect those vulnerable Democrats next year who voted for Obamacare in 2010. As Noemie Emery writes in the Washington Examiner:

The employer mandate, set for next year, may cancel existing plans for as many as 93 million Americans just in time for 2014 midterms, and Obama is no longer the force that he was.

In 2009-2010, he was still the boy wonder, so crippling him at the start of his term was considered unthinkable and opposing his signature act was a sin.

In 2014, he’ll be battered and dinged, a lame duck on his way out, his personal approval ratings down around 40 percent for the first time ever. And this is before he was known to have lied about Americans being able to keep their coverage.

By 2014, opposing him may be tempting even for Democrats. “What we’re seeing,” a New Hampshire political scientist told Richard Cowen of Reuters, is Shaheen “trying to limit her personal downside.” If going out on a limb for Obama starts getting risky, she’ll go back to the trunk of the tree.

So may large numbers of dubious squirrels. For the future of health care, cast your eyes leftward. For the time being, cherchez les Dems.

We’ll explore another revealing moment that occurred during the president’s faux-pology interview a moment, but first, some backstory to lay the groundwork. After Obama prototype George McGovern lost his reelection bid to the Senate in 1980, he attempted to open, Bob Newhart-style, a Connecticut inn. After years of being in the Senate and routinely fleecing businesses to feed Washington’s ravenous coffers, he found out the hard way just how difficult running a private enterprise could be:

George McGovern laments that after his experience in the bed-and-breakfast business he realizes that laws and regulations pertaining to small business are actually hurting the lower-wage workers whom he had tried to help during his entire political career. With his Stratford Inn in bankruptcy, McGovern now says:

In retrospect, I wish I had known more about the hazards and difficulties of such a business…. I wish that during the years I was in public office I had this firsthand experience about the difficulties business people face every day. That knowledge would have made me a better Senator and a more understanding presidential contender… To create job opportunities, we need entrepreneurs who will risk their capital against an expected payoff. Too often, however, public policy does not consider whether we are choking off those opportunities.

As James Lileks noted last night on the Internet-only “Aftershow” segment of the Hugh Hewitt Show, Barack Obama was portrayed as being a high-tech wonk by the media in 2008, for little reason other than his MSM supporters also fancy themselves to be high-tech wonks, ergo, their favorite presidential candidate must be one himself.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
That is exactly right. He did not apologize for his personal lying about people losing their health insurance. He simply said that he was sorry that people ARE losing their health insurance. It's like a murderer "apologizing" to a victim's family, "I am sorry that you loved one died early."
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I really don't care if the King of Amerikaa apologizes for lying (misspeaking), or if anyone else apologizes for their transgressions. Apologies solve ZERO problems. Apologies (by politicians in particular) are meant to be a distraction. The old saying that it is easier to ask for forgiveness rather than for permission is totally applicable......As far as the King being burned by the website, well, the website is only the tip of the 99.9999% submerged iceberg that is the ACA. The REAL problems are how the law will affect and is affecting the public. The Dems (and the Dem-Lites AKA the Republicans) say ACA is the law of the land and cannot be repealed. So was SLAVERY the law of the land.................
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
You're right, Mr President, no private sector, entrepreneur, businessman or woman could ever have built this giant, never-ending heap of turds and lies. To do this, it takes 100% unadulterated BS mixed with cronyism, boondoggles, pocket-lining, kickbacks, graft, fraud, payoffs, money-under-the-table, intimidation, extortion and good ole lefty lies totally supported by journalistic malfeasance, bureaucratic malfeasance and legal malfeasance. Only then would you be able to get some dumb ass, nihilistic 'It's all about me' legacy that stinks up the whole of the United States of America for many years to come.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (26)
All Comments   (26)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
The Mayo clinic may be on to something: The following is an excellent "fit" of our president's demeanor and behavior:

"Narcissistic personality disorder is characterized by dramatic, emotional behavior, which is in the same category as antisocial and borderline personality disorders.

Narcissistic personality disorder symptoms may include:

Believing that you're better than others
Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
Exaggerating your achievements or talents
Expecting constant praise and admiration
Believing that you're special and acting accordingly
Failing to recognize other people's emotions and feelings
Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
Taking advantage of others
Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
Being jealous of others
Believing that others are jealous of you
Trouble keeping healthy relationships
Setting unrealistic goals
Being easily hurt and rejected
Having a fragile self-esteem
Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional

Although some features of narcissistic personality disorder may seem like having confidence or strong self-esteem, it's not the same. Narcissistic personality disorder crosses the border of healthy confidence and self-esteem into thinking so highly of yourself that you put yourself on a pedestal. In contrast, people who have healthy confidence and self-esteem don't value themselves more than they value others."
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I don't know how many doctors there are in the U.S., but it seems to me they have a lot of leverage [Not the AMA; they bow to O]. If they could organize and agree to resist the law, go on strike; what would Obama do? Jail them? Kill them?
As it is, they can refuse to take Medicare, Medicaid patients; with an influx of 30 million new patients and many doctors retiring early, there will be a shortage, and they will have to be forced to treat these patients for very little pay.
I see this as just one of many issues which are potential powderkegs on the road to socialism, Communism, statism, whatever you want to call it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Mr. Obama and his advisors have arrived at that point in psychological time where they are convinced that whatever they do and say is right. They also know that they have been lying about the foreseeable effects of Obamacare but it doesn't matter because it servees what they believe is the "greater good." (Getting insurance to the uninsured.) As those who read Victor David Hanson know, this can be construed as example of what the Greeks called hubris or "arrogance toward the gods." (It also involved a certain detachment from reality.) Those gulity of hubris were liable to call down on their heads Nemesis, the goddess of retribution and implacable justice. This is one reason why the classicists most admired those public men who possessed a degree of humility. This last quality is completely foreign to Barack Obama and his circle and it's absence may yet prove to be their downfall.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
and if you remember B.O. said he wanted to transform this country and in his so called apology he said, it is very clear what I am trying to do.

Very clear to people like Rush, back in 2008 and to others, he wants to harm this country, redistribute wealth, and get away being filthy rich to enjoy his life after wrecking havoc, pain and misery on so many.

Might be a reason he made it possible to have life time protection for himself, after he leaves office.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
We are being too limited in our attacks of these lies.

This really good article details the scope of lies this ice skating President has performed and rightly asserts it is an impeachable offense.

More specifically, the words of a President are protected the same way a Senator or Representative cannot be sued for defamation for what they say on the floor of the House or Senate.

BUT. THIS EXEMPTION DOES NOT MEAN that people like David Axelrod, Ezekiel Emmanuel, and the dozens of writers of this legislation are not in any way liable.

Think of this. It is merely true that it cannot be that these background movers and shakers, advocates and writers are not liable in any way to whatever - even minor - degree.

Surely lawyers could make a case. The case may lose, but please do not tell me lawyers can't figure out how to make an initial case.

So where are the lawyers? Where are the lawyers making class action suits against the persons who wrote this legislation on behalf of those who because of the writing of this legislation are losing their coverage with no better alternatives.

Maybe it is true - woe on all of us if it is - that Conservatives aren't really serious. Maybe they want only to point out what these people are like and garner people to agree with them on the hope that if that happens enough we might have a sea change.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
if he were a spokesman for this product he would be sued for lying.

I have heard the term fraudulent inducement, to describe his comments, and that might be actionable and would love to see the class action law suit against him

But barring that, I want a redo on B.O. car with what we know, now in the equation and see how and if this bill would ever pass.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Obama’s policies continue to worsen economic conditions in every blue state and some of their citizens–mostly younger ones—are voting with their feet and going to red states. Business starts in blue states are down and some corporations are decamping to friendlier pastures—and this on top of the blue state public debt-death spiral! To get out of it and preserve what’s left of their economies beleaguered voters in blue states will be forced to rid themselves of their dem members of Congress. O might achieve the fundamental transformation of America after all.

The law of unintended consequences could have been written with someone like Obama in mind.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
“Obama Burns Media Supporters with Apology.” - that about says it all. Without the media's complicit propaganda and complete lack of skeptical fact-finding and reporting we would not be in this situation.

The only reason this President has gotten away with his soft tyranny of Executive Orders, regulations, intimidation and disregard for enforcing laws is because we have lost the function of a skeptical and investigative-minded media.

The pathetic part is knowing that as soon as there is a Republican congress and/or President the media whores will awaken from their slumber to once again become questioning, challenging, investigating crusaders for "truth" once again! They'll suddenly regain their journalistic chops and may even apologize - Barack-style for being lost in the wilderness during the previous 8 years and solemnly re-commit to playing their traditional adversarial role. The fact that a Republican congress or President is in power will be mere coincidence with this epiphany. LOL
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The media lost their credibility at the same time their hero lost his.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Is there now a point of diminishing returns for detailed fractionating of the "whos", "whys", "HIH even possibles" of the destroyer/hater-in-WH and all who have created and further sustained him?
Sadly, so and too much has occurred to change much in any of our lifetimes.
What will make a difference *now* is a better, smarter, more ethical, informed, better led, truly cherishing and patriotic , and thus conservative U.S. Senate in 2014. Feel, analyze, lament, rant and so on. Then, start your own part of it happening.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Note to Prezzy: Obamacare. You did build it. You defended it. Whatever you needed to say, you said it. You own it. All of it. The website. The canceled policies. The people who will die because their current care will be interrupted. Or never resumed.

None of that will matter to you. What will matter is what you also own, the political fallout. And the impact on your legacy. When you no longer have the power of the government to harrass your opponents and control the narrative, these are going to feel like the good ol' days.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
" the nation knows he is a charlatan"

I live in liberalland. The truly shocking thing here is, no, they still don't believe he is a charlatan. The true believers still believe. It's seriously undermining my hope for this country that so many can willfully choose to believe a lie.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And now you know why it was imperative that the collectivists take over the nations lower and upper education system. Can't have critical sir.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All