Barack, You’re Lying, and I’m Calling You On It
By SusanUnPC on January 21, 2008 at 9:30 PM in Clinton, Obama, Ronald Reagan
A lie is a lie is a lie. You can’t rewrite what you said to fit whichever audience is in front of you. Especially when your original statement had the intent of 1) winning an endorsement from a conservative editorial board, and 2) trying to woo Republican voters to you.
You especially can’t rewrite what you originally said to make yourself again palatable to Democratic voters who are furious with 1) your expressed admiration for Ronald Reagan and 2) with your specious claim that the GOP has been the “party of ideas” for the last 10 to 15 years.
What he said tonight: Barack Obama lied in the CNN debate tonight. He told Hillary Clinton, in a heated exchange (I backed up my DVR and typed each word):
You just said I complimented the Republican ideas. That is not true. That isn’t what I said, and I will provide you with a quote, what I said was is that [sic] Ronald Reagan was a transformative political figure because he was able to get Democrats to vote against their economic interests to form a majority to push through their agenda, an agenda that I objected to because while I was working on those streets, watchin’ those folks …
What he really said: Here is exactly what Barack Obama told the conservative editorial board of the Reno Gazette, via Matt Stoller at Open Left — who provides both the video and a transcript:
I don’t want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what’s different are the times. I do think that for example the 1980 was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.
DO YOU SEE ANYWHERE IN THAT ORIGINAL TRANSCRIPT that, as Barack claims tonight, he said that Reagan “was able to get Democrats to vote against their economic interests”? No. Because he never said that until TONIGHT.
Here’s Paul Krugman’s take, and the kicker line is bold-faced. From “Debunking the Reagan Myth,” Paul Krugman, New York Times, January 21, 2008:
… [T]he furor over Barack Obama’s praise for Ronald Reagan is not, as some think, overblown. The fact is that how we talk about the Reagan era still matters immensely for American politics.
Bill Clinton knew that in 1991, when he began his presidential campaign. “The Reagan-Bush years,” he declared, “have exalted private gain over public obligation, special interests over the common good, wealth and fame over work and family. The 1980s ushered in a Gilded Age of greed and selfishness, of irresponsibility and excess, and of neglect.”
Contrast that with Mr. Obama’s recent statement, in an interview with a Nevada newspaper, that Reagan offered a “sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.”
[HERE's THE PUNCH LINE.] Maybe Mr. Obama was, as his supporters insist, simply praising Reagan’s political skills. (I think he was trying to curry favor with a conservative editorial board, which did in fact endorse him.) But where in his remarks was the clear declaration that Reaganomics failed?
Exactly.
Here is the video from last Monday, via Open Left:
Again, I give you what Barack attempted to say was his real statement, countering Hillary Clinton who, of course, doesn’t have the benefit of YouTube at her podium (how I wish she did):
You just said I complimented the Republican ideas. That is not true. isn’t what I said, and I will provide you with a quote, what I said was is that [sic] Ronald Reagan was a transformative political figure because he was able to get Democrats to vote against their economic interests to form a majority to push through their agenda, an agenda that I objected to because while I was working on those streets, watchin’ those folks …
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
