Obama Misleads on Court Decision

"In a demogogic bid to score populist points, Obama claimed that the decision striking down restrictions on corporate spending opened 'the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections.' In fact, the justices explicitly left untouched a statute that bans election spending by foreign corporations, even 'indirectly.'" 

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/not_true_sums_it_up_lxolwWzSDRFX27zArOVu7J

'Not true' sums it up

Mis-statements of the Union

New York Post

Last Updated: 10:35 AM, January 29, 2010

Posted: 1:26 AM, January 29, 2010

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito let a pained expression cross his face and muttered, "Not true." He was reacting to President Obama's description of the high court's ruling in the Citizens United case, and he was entirely right. But the words aptly sum up the entire State of the Union Address.<p> </p><br> In a demogogic bid to score populist points, Obama claimed that the decision striking down restrictions on corporate spending opened "the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections." In fact, the justices<p> </p><br>explicitlyleft untouched a statute that bans election spending by foreign corporations, even "indirectly."<p> </p><br> There isn't even a "loophole" for US subsidiaries of foreign firms, as the White House later claimed in a bid to defend the president's false charge.<p> </p><br> Ever since Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts, the left has thrown up a thick cloud of spin, rationalizations and delusion. Wednesday night, the president kept it up. He spoke for more than an hour, but the quick gloss might have been,<p> </p><br>It's not my fault, and please ig nore the evidence of your lying eyes.<p> </p><br> * Obama said that, thanks to the stimulus, "There are about 2 million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed." The Web site Politifact points out that the White House Council of Economic Advisers estimates 1.5 to 2 million more jobs from the stimulus; Obama took the highest number and skipped over the fact that these numbers are elaborate guesstimates from an outfit that has every incentive to make the numbers look as cheery as possible.<p> </p><br> If he were being conscientious, he'd cite the wide range of estimates for jobs affected by the stimulus, with the caveat that we really can't know. In any case, the administration originally told us the stimulus would keep unemployment below 8 percent: By that standard, it's has been a rank failure.<p> </p><br> * On health care, it was more of the same.<p> </p><br> Obama said the bill would "preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan." He's been flogging this line throughout the long health-care debate -- even though it's utterly discredited. The Congressional Budget Office says millions will lose their current employer-provided coverage.<p> </p><br> He said it would reduce premiums "for millions." Maybe, but it would<p> </p><br>increasepremiums for millions more.<p> </p><br> He said the CBO estimates it will reduce the deficit by "as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades." Yet the CBO also made clear that the assumptions behind that estimate are dubious in the extreme.<p> </p><br> It isn't that people haven't been listening as Obama repeats these words again and again -- it's that they rightly don't believe them.<p> </p><br> * Obama offered a highly misleading account of the fiscal situation. He noted that we had a budget surplus of more than $200 billion in 2000, but a deficit of more than $1 trillion before he took office. Implicitly blaming President George W. Bush, he said most of the deficit came from "not paying for two wars, two tax cuts and an expensive prescription drug program."<p> </p><br> True, but incomplete. In 2007, the deficit was still only about $160 billion. It blew up with the recession and TARP. Those obviously pre-date President Obama -- but they would also naturally recede over time. Obama's historic spending spree and ever-growing entitlements are what create the current string of $1 trillion deficits as far as the eye can see.<p> </p><br> * Acknowledging the problem of the ever-spiraling debt, he committed to naming a bipartisan commission charged with providing "a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline." Fearsome-sounding, eh?<p> </p><br> But nothing's stopping Obama -- who<p> </p><br>ispresident, with large majorities in Congress -- from proposing a budget that puts us on a more sustainable path. Instead, he slaps a fresh coat of "bold and fresh" paint on the tired, old Washington expedient of a commission.<p> </p><br> * As a more immediate antidote, Obama proposes a three-year spending freeze on discretionary domestic spending. But that represents about 13 percent of the federal budget. Over the last two years, this portion of the budget -- about $450 billion -- has seen an almost 20 percent increase, notes the Heritage Foundation's Brian Riedl. And that's not even counting the $300 billion layered on top it in the stimulus bill.<p> </p><br> And the freeze is supposed to save $15 billion next year, but Obama called for a new "jobs bill" that, in the House, is costing another $150 billion. This does not add up to fiscal restraint.<p> </p><br> * He decried the "deficit of trust" in Washington without admitting his contributions to it. The kind of tougher restrictions on lobbyists he plugged for won't restore trust in Washington as long as the White House is cutting back-room deals with union bosses and the pharmaceutical industry.<p> </p><br> * Obama said we "can't wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side." Did someone tell David Plouffe? He's Obama's campaign manager from 2008, now taking a stepped-up role for the White House to try to wage the perpetual campaign more effectively.<p> </p><br> Obama now labors under a reality problem. He's crafted a fantasy universe where he and his friends can live unperturbed, comforted by their just-so stories. The rest of us can only, like Alito, crinkle our noses and mutter, "Not true."<p> </p><br> comments.lowry@ nationalreview.com<p> </p><br>

Rich Lowry