Scientific frauds are getting shown up more and more these days.

Another one from Pajamas Media. Are we surprised?

WHO Study Used to Justify ObamaCare a Scientific Fraud

Findings were skewed to show better performance from countries with socialized health care systems.
by Rich Baehr

During the long debate over health care reform in 2009 and 2010, the advocates for the legislation made several key arguments, suggesting most of all that a health care financing system that covered a large number of the currently uninsured would be fairer — that a primary goal of health care reform was redistribution. This argument reflected the conclusions of a 2000 study by the World Health Organization, which made fairness the most important single aspect in its evaluation and comparison of health care systems around the world.
....
An article in the current issue of Commentary (subscription only) suggests that the WHO study, which provided the “moral” basis and primary justification for ObamaCare, is deeply flawed.

Read the whole article for all the details.

Victor Davis Hanson names it correctly again

Nobody can make a correct point quite like VDH.  Can we call him a political John Wayne?  Well, according to this he probably wouldn't want that designation because of John Wayne's personal life.

Kingdom of Lies

I am a subject in a kingdom of lies. At 57, I have grown up with decades of untruth — advanced for the purposes of purported social unity, the noble aim of egalitarianism, and the advancement of a cognitive elite in government, journalism, the arts, and the universities.

Alger Hiss really was a communist operative, albeit an elegant and snooty sort of one. The Rosenbergs were tag-team spies.... I admire the lives of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, even as I sensed there were large areas of their biographies that simply could not be disclosed and that the censorship was apparently for our own good. I know that if I did what Eliot Spitzer did I would not be hosting a TV show.

I did not quite know how “witch hunt” characterized the often disreputable tactics of Joe McCarthy — cruel and obnoxious were the better adjectives. You see, there were really communists in Hollywood at a time of a dangerous global cold war against communism, in a way there were never any witches at all in Salem.

But then for some reason I sensed that a murderous, camouflaged Fidel Castro killed more innocents than a murderous, gold-braided Augusto Pinochet. I accepted that we were to be silent about the former’s crimes since his ends were said to be good, while the latter’s crimes were for the bad — though economists of no particular political affiliations have shown that Chileans escaped poverty and dictatorship while Cubans were, and are still, plagued by both.

As far as Hollywood, goes, as I have said, I do not go to the cinema at all. The choices are meager. We can watch a George Clooney, Matt Damon, or Ben Affleck — multimillionaires all of mediocre talent — uncover some corporate or CIA conspiracy that threatens the environment (their employers and distributors are not corporate?), the non-white male, or global peace — or sit through yuppie crises whose double entendres and cute repartees are known mostly only to metrosexuals between New York and D.C., or from Malibu to Newport Beach. .....

The media is our ministry of truth of the Oceania brand: one day Guantanamo, renditions, tribunals, preventive detention, Predators, the Patriot Act, and Iraq were bad; then one day in January 2009 I woke up and heard of them not all.....

Much, so much more from VDH. Read it all here.

Not just lies, but slander?

I'm not a lawyer, just a little old lady, but I call this slander.

Horrible… Obama and Reuters Rewrite History to Smear Bush
Posted by Jim Hoft

Horrible.

Barack Obama smeared Bush this week while discussing Libya in Chile.

The Plum Line reported, via FOX Nation:

In Chile, Obama puts forth his doctrine, defending the Libya mission by claiming that humanitarian interventionism is the “core principle that has to be upheld.”

Crucially, Obama also took a tacit shot at Bush, comparing his own multilateral approach favorably to the former president’s:

“In the past there have been times when the United States acted unilaterally or did not have full international support, and as a consequence typically it was the United States military that ended up bearing the entire burden.”

Adding to the confusion… Reuters repeated the lie yesterday.

That wasn't confusion - that was slander.

Obama is committed to partnering with other countries rather than going it alone as did his predecessor George W. Bush, which both broadens and complicates the decision-making process.

This was a lie.

President Bush had twice as many allies in his Iraqi Coalition than Obama has in Libya.
Reuters… And Obama… Need to apologize and correct their awful smear against Bush.

The Adminstration is using DOJ and IRS to try to squelch opponents

UPDATED below
This is according to an editorial in the Wall Street Journal.

Shutting Up Business
Democrats unleash the IRS and Justice on donors to their political opponents.
If at first you don't succeed, get some friends in high places to shut your opponents up. That's the latest Washington power play, as Democrats and liberals attack the Chamber of Commerce and independent spending groups in an attempt to stop businesses from participating in politics.
[....]
Chairman Max Baucus of the powerful Senate Finance Committee got the threats going last month when he asked Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman to investigate if certain tax exempt 501(c) groups had violated the law by engaging in too much political campaign activity. Lest there be any confusion about his targets, the Montana Democrat flagged articles focused on GOP-leaning groups, including Americans for Job Security and American Crossroads.

......In a letter to the Federal Election Commission, Minnesota Senator Al Franken expressed his profound concern that "foreign corporations are indirectly spending significant sums to influence American elections through third-party groups." From the man who stole his Senate election in a dubious recount, this is rich.

Even Mr. Franken admits in his letter that the Chamber's commingling of funds in its general accounts is not "per se illegal," but apparently he thinks it's fine to unleash federal investigators because the Chamber cash might contribute to the defeat of fellow Democrats.

The outrage over the Chamber is especially amusing considering the role of foreigners in U.S. labor unions. According to the Center for Competitive Politics, close to half of the unions that are members of the AFL-CIO are international. One man's corporate commingling is another's union dues.

There is more in the editorial, I have copied just a little. Read it all here.

UPDATE: I had guests yesterday so didn't do much online or watch the Sunday News shows. Apparently I missed CBS laughing at Axelrod over their attempt to slam the Chamber:

Schieffer Mocks Axelrod: Is Complaining About GOP Ad Dollars ‘The Best You Can Do?’
by Noel Sheppard

CBS’s Bob Schieffer on Sunday mocked President Obama’s senior adviser David Axelrod for echoing last week’s unsubstantiated charge by a liberal website that the Chamber of Commerce is funneling foreign money to support Republican candidates.

“The New York Times looked into the Chamber specifically and said the Chamber really isn’t putting foreign money into the campaign,” said the Face the Nation host.

“This part about foreign money, that appears to be peanuts,” chided Schieffer.
When Axelrod continued to press the issue, Schieffer said almost laughing, “If the only charge, three weeks into the election that the Democrats can make is that there’s somehow this may or may not be foreign money coming into the campaign, is that the best you can do?”

Indeed, which means that in the course of roughly 24 hours, both the New York Times and Bob Schieffer thought CAP’s claim was largely a bunch of baloney.

Even the folks at CBS remember where a lot of the Obama campaign money came from...
Read it all at Newsbusters.

We are all feeling alienated from our government

There are good reasons why. Here are some links:

The House Divided (Andrew McCarthy in National Review)
How long can a people remain a People when its leaders side with its foes?

Getting Lectured on Human Rights by Mexico (Mona Charen, National Review)

Krauthammer's Take (the Corner from National Review)

The Privileged Call for Limited Dictatorships (The Anchoress, First Things Magazine)
be sure you read this one if you don't read any of the others.

The New International Order (Richard Fernandez from Belmont Club, Pajama media)
another one of the "must reads."

Reason Magazine tells it like it is

 Obama and the L-word

The president’s habit of telling untruths

by Matt Welch

Here’s how predictable the president’s slippery relationship with the truth has become: Hours before the State of the Union address, Washington Examiner reporter Timothy P. Carney posted a “pre-emptive fact check” that, among other things, prebutted any presidential claim to have “stopped the revolving door between government and corporate lobbying.” As it happened, that night Barack Obama made an even bolder (read: less truthful) claim: that “we’ve excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs.”

In fact, more than 40 former lobbyists work in the administration, including such policy makers as Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn (who was lobbying for Raytheon as recently as 2008), Office of the First Lady Director of Policy and Projects Jocelyn Frye (National Partnership for Women and Families), White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs Cecilia Muñoz (National Council of La Raza), and Treasury Secretary Chief of Staff Mark Patterson (Goldman Sachs).

Read the rest here.

Oh, What a Tangled Web...

We heard about one brief, well here is the full story, it is from Reuters. via Drudge Report..

Att'y general failed to give legal briefs to Senate
(Reuters) - Attorney General Eric Holder failed to tell the Senate about seven legal briefs he signed when lawmakers considered his nomination to his current job, according to a letter released on Friday.
Barack Obama
Two of the briefs involved appeals to the Supreme Court for Jose Padilla, who sought release from a military prison in South Carolina where he was being held after then-President George W. Bush designated him an "enemy combatant."
Padilla was held in a military brig for three years before his case was moved to a criminal court in Miami, where he was convicted on charges of offering his services to militants.
The Justice Department sent the Senate Judiciary Committee, which vets presidential nominees, a list of briefs that were omitted on Friday. "We regret the omission," Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich said in a letter to the panel.
Holder has been facing intense scrutiny as the Obama administration tries to decide whether to prosecute terrorism suspects like the self-proclaimed mastermind of the September 11, 2001 attacks Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in military or criminal courts.
The attorney general had been spearheading that effort but concerns about holding those trials in criminal court forced the White House to intervene and officials are now weighing whether to prosecute Mohammed and four of his alleged co-conspirators in a military court.
Previously, Holder has disclosed to the Senate five briefs he submitted to the Supreme Court during his law practice. From July 2001 until being confirmed by the Senate as attorney general, Holder worked at Covington & Burling in Washington.
Earlier this week, the Justice Department said Holder failed to tell the Senate about one brief he signed related to the Padilla case, prompting outcries from Republicans who said it offered more details about Holder's views on key policies.
The other six briefs related to issues such as race discrimination and a challenge to a prison sentence.
(Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky, editing by Todd Eastham)

Somehow We Missed This from the MSM

A Google search shows who did cover it.  One of the links is to this article in Pajamas Media.

Anti-Lobbyist’ Obama Administration Recruited Left-Wing Lobbyists to Sell Bogus ‘Green Jobs’

by Christopher Horner

After two studies refuted President Barack Obama’s assertions regarding the success of Spain’s and Denmark’s wind energy programs, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request reveals the Department of Energy turned to George Soros and to wind industry lobbyists to attack the studies.

Via the FOIA request, the Competitive Enterprise Institute has learned that the Department of Energy — specifically the office headed by Al Gore’s company’s former CEO, Cathy Zoi — turned to George Soros’ Center for American Progress and other wind industry lobbyists to help push Obama’s wind energy proposals.

Read the whole article for the complete story. Just more of the same from this administration, certainly not any transparency here or in anything else they do. If they don't like the truth they hide it, lie about it and stick their heads in the sand so they don't see it. Disgusting.  We cannot believe anything about this gang.

Another Post on Lies from the Administration

Yesterday's post on Lies was titled by my son who was visiting and reading what I was posting.  Today he is not here but it is amazing how many of the headlines do have to do with lying.  This post will have only the most blatant.

From CNSNews:
The Lies About Green Jobs
By Alan Caruba

“I was impressed as never before by the utter lack of logic of the man, the scantiness of his precise knowledge of things that he was talking about, by the gross inaccuracies in his statements, by the almost pathological lack of sequences in his discussion, by the complete rectitude that he felt as to his own conduct, by the immense and growing egotism that came from his office, by his willingness to continue the excoriation of the press and business in order to get votes for himself, by his indifference to what effect the long-continued pursuit of these ends would have upon the civilization in which he was playing a part.”

No, this was not a judgment of President Barack Obama, though the description eerily fits him. It was the view of Raymond Moley, a Columbia University professor and member of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “Brain Trust” who often wrote or helped write FDR’s major speeches. FDR’s policies extended the Great Depression for ten years.

Here are some facts worth considering every time Obama calls for an expansion or intercession of the federal government as an answer to the current financial crisis:

Social Security, a cornerstone of FDR’s administration, was established in 1935. After 74 years it is on the brink of insolvency because Congress gave itself access to its funds.

Fannie Mae was established in 1938 to facilitate home ownership. It has been around for 71 years. Congress has had to seize control of it and of Freddie Mac, established in 1970. Together, they presently own or guarantee about half of the United States’ $12 trillion mortgage market.

The War on Poverty started in 1964. One trillion dollars has been transferred to “the poor” and it has not worked.

The Department of Energy was established in 1977 to lessen dependence on the import of foreign oil. With 16,000 employees and an annual budget of $24 billion, the United States has imported more oil with every passing year while denying U.S. oil companies access to vast national reserves in ANWR and off our continental shelf. It is an abysmal failure.

All of these programs were put forth by liberals, now calling themselves “progressives,” initiated by Democrat administrations to advance what they call “social justice.” The Obama administration is hell-bent on “health care reform” that will put one sixth of the U.S. economy under the control of the federal government whose interventions in the free market have been the cause of the previous recessions.

 

In 2010, the Obama administration says it intends to relieve the job shortage by creating “green jobs” in the sectors of wind and solar power and biofuels. It has announced a program that will cost $2.3 billion, costing approximately $135,000 per job.

Go read the rest of this article in which all is explained about why "green jobs" is such a fantasy and how much it could actually cost in the future.
 
From Jewish World Review more on lies:
Secrets and Lies
by Arnold Ahlert  

"Listen.. (doo wah doo) Do you want to know a secret?..."—The Beatles

Apparently, Congressional Democrats, and an increasingly tone-deaf president, aren't Beatles fans. In yet another display of arrogance mixed with utter contempt for the public, these folks have decided that the only sensible way to craft a health care bill is to do it beyond the "prying eyes" of ordinary Americans.

Thus, one of the most unsavory troikas in the history of American politics—Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama—are cobbling together a take-it-or-leave-it takeover of one-sixth of the American economy. Moe, Larry and Curly couldn't have done a better job of mocking transparent government.

The American public? Once again it is worth reminding people that the American left sees their fellow Americans as hopelessly stupid, and completely unable to think or do for ourselves. As such, ignoring the majority's opposition to this monstrosity is as easy as Sunday morning. After all, what could a bunch of red-neck, tea-bagging, Neanderthal, astro-turf, religion-clinging, gun-toting rubes know about health care?

We know at least one thing, you arrogant, elitist hacks: we'll be paying the multi-trillion dollar tab for this steaming pile of socialist sludge....

Further into the article he says...

 ........House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave herself a good chuckle when a reporter asked the if president Obama had reneged on his promise of transparent government: "There are a number of things he was for on the campaign trail," she giggled.

Mrs. Pelosi is absolutely right. President Obama—on eight separate, well-documented occasions—promised that the process for creating this legislation would indeed be "transparent." Unfortunately, this president has amply demonstrated that he can lie without the slightest hesitation or remorse whenever it suits his agenda. Perhaps the Speaker of the House is amused by the fact that her own promise "to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history" was just as big a lie.

Read the whole article you will want to copy and send it around.

You Lie! (Just like everybody else...)

From the telegraph UK:

Climate change: the true price of the warmists' folly is becoming clear

From the Met Office's mistakes to Gordon Brown's wind farms, the cost of 'green' policies is growing, warns Christopher Booker

Impeccable was the timing of that announcement that directors of the Met Office were last year given pay rises of up to 33 per cent, putting its £200,000-a-year chief executive into a higher pay bracket than the Prime Minister. As Britain shivered through Arctic cold and its heaviest snowfalls for decades, our global-warming-obsessed Government machine was caught out in all directions.

For a start, we saw Met Office spokesmen trying to explain why it had got its seasonal forecasts hopelessly wrong for three cold winters and three cool summers in a row. The current cold snap, we were told with the aid of the BBC – itself facing an inquiry into its relentless obsession with “global warming” – was just a “regional” phenomenon, due to “natural” factors. No attempt was made to explain why the same freezing weather is affecting much of the northern hemisphere (with 1,200 places in the US alone last week reporting record snow and low temperatures). And this is the body on which, through its Hadley Centre for Climate Change and the discredited Climatic Research Unit, the world’s politicians rely for weather forecasting 100 years ahead.

Then, as councils across Britain ran out of salt for frozen roads, we had the Transport Minister, Lord Adonis, admitting that we entered this cold spell with only six days’ supply of grit. No mention of the fact that the Highways Agency and councils had been advised that there was no need for them to stockpile any more – let alone that many councils now have more “climate change officials” than gritters. Read it all.

From PowerLine:

Why is Umar being Treated as a Criminal Rather than an enemy Combatant?

The Obama administration's decision to treat Umar Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant rather than an enemy combatant is indefensible on the merits. It is also incredibly costly in terms of foregone intelligence. The administration's combined arrogance and stupidity would be laughable if their consequences weren't so serious.

Today's Telegraph carries Philip Sherwell's article quoting former Senator and 9/11 Commission member Slade Gorton on the issue. Speaking of Abdulmutallab, Gorton says:

"He was singing like a canary, then we charged him in civilian proceedings, he got a lawyer and shut up," Slade Gorton, a member of the 9/11 Commission that investigated the Sept 2001 terror attacks on the US, told The Sunday Telegraph.

"I find it incomprehensible that this administration is treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue. The president has finally said that we are at war with al-Qaeda. Well, if this is a war, then Abdulmutallab should be treated as a combatant not a criminal."

Why is the Obama administration treating Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant? It is an unbelievable fact that we have as yet no straightforward answer to this question. There is, in any event, no good answer to it. If we are at war with al Qaeda, as Obama himself asserted last week in the statement to which Gorton alludes, why are we treating Umar Abdulmutallab (not to mention Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) like John Gotti?

JOHN adds: Check out, too, Marc Thiessen's excellent piece which explains the unique value of intelligence gained from captured al Qaeda terrorists.

From NeoNeocon:
Are Obama’s lies politics as usual?

Most people now recognize that Obama has been lying about a lot of things. But it’s often said that’s just business as usual for politicians, and that anyone who thinks otherwise is being naive.

Blogger Richard Fernandez of Belmont Club, a writer with a keen mind and a graceful style, as well as more than his share of that rare commodity known as wisdom, has this to say on the subject:

An Election Promise is now almost synonymous with a Lie. Few voters believe that an election promise will actually be kept, but many vote according to what they are promised anyway…

From Just One Minute:
What Columbia And Harvard Man Could?
From a Mark Steyn headline:

Obama can't say who we're at war with

Posted by Tom Maguire

Well of course he can't - having elected a properly educated Columbia and Harvard man, we look to Obama for leadership on critical issues such as the proper distinction between "who" and "whom", not to mention the vital national security matter of ending sentences with prepositions. C'mon - this is the President who returned the Churchill bust, so we can hardly look to him for Churchillian leadership.

Now, if Obama could tell us with whom we are at war, that might be helpful. But can we handle the truth? Eric Holder seems to think we are at war with the Evil BushCo legacy.

Something we have been thinking here at our house now posted in an article from Bookworm:

Obama’s emotional affiliations are not American

Bookworm on Jan 10 2010

I’ve been harping for years now about the fact that Obama’s emotional connection isn’t to America, but to something else. I’ve thought it was to Leftism. Rabbi Spero makes the very good argument that Barack Hussein Obama’s emotional affiliation is to Islam. He doesn’t say that Obama is a religious Muslim. He just notes that Obama’s emotions, when not tied to Leftist causes, resonate with a desire to admire and, to America’s cost, protect Islam.

Great. Just what we need in our White House: a Lefty Islamophile.