ENOUGH about how ObamaCare reveals the president to be "a liar".

This is the fellow, when his friend and mentor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright was shown to regularly preach hatred of white America and Jews, from the altar, and bestow medals on Louis
Farrakhan, who proclaimed himself shocked, shocked.

When, during the 2008 campaign, the Iraq war, which he had declared unwinnable was being won, this congenital dove wiped the egg off his face by accusing the Republicans of neglecting Afghanistan and promising to make it the central front in the war on terror.

After having opposed gay marriage during the 2004 election, in obedience to his Christan teaching, he became a supporter of gay marriage for the 2012 election, in loyalty to the Sermon on the Mount.

With a halting voice he spoke on TV after the Newtown shooting, repeatedly dabbing his tears from the outer end of the eye.

This man has so often revealed himself as a liar, an actor, a performer. That it took these ObamaCare contradictions to expose that fact is preposterous and an irony.

For once he was not being selfish, he was not lying on his own behalf. It was not to advance his career, it was to push a program he sincerely believes beneficial. Sure, his ego is involved in his signature program, but it also and truly an attempt to tackle a genuine health care crisis that threatens to hemorrhage the nation. It does more harm than good, but it meant to be good. It is well intentioned and he clearly thought, supporting it with untruths was not lying but justifiable fibbing.

Leaders are sometimes pressed to that expedient, for the sake of the nation. FDR, for example, after solemnly promising not to involve America in foreign wars, bent every effort to do the reverse. He diverted billions to Manhattan project, without telling Congress, a clear violation for the sake of the nation. One can imagine Obama telling himself he was lying for the sake of a program the nation needed.

And the irony is that this is the lie this throughly selfish and deceitful man got caught on.

Very interesting observations.

Jack_nSlvrSprng

No, " it is [NOT]a general characteristic of all Leftists."

"Making things up" is a characteristic of all ideologues, whether of the left or the right, secular or religious. They feel entitled to correct disagreeable facts and think up more convenient ones, because they are so sure they have the truth and are right. That certainty requires them to support their great cause, with lies and distortions if necessary.

When such an ideologue is also a born actor, a nimble talker, and a shameless opportunist, we have the Obama described by Peter Wehner.

Right on A66.

Not only does Israel remain a haven for endangered Jews, it is a window into the world's continued obsession and hatred of Jew. Europe piously despising and railing at the wicked Zionists for prevailing over their genocidal foes is sheer anti-Semitism. Jews, safe and comfortable in America, must be made to see that, to identify with their co-religionists under siege in Israel. American Jews must come to understand that their country is an anomaly. In the real world a Jewish claim to Jerusalem is denied and fending off genocidal Arabs is called an immoral occupation.

There is no forcing a religious commitment on Jews in America, but it is possible to identify them with Jews who are besieged by genocidal Arabs, supported by much of the traditionally anti Semitic world.

Drone strikes can be justified with various arguments, but that the WWII fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed 90,000 people, was many times worse, is not one of them.

Why have my two attempts to reply to coltakashi "been deleted by the administrator" ?

My reply merely contradicted coltakashi's assertion that the number of Jews and of homosexuals in the total US population are similar. (Jews are under two percent while homosexuals are over six percent).

But I agreed that Hollywood and TV are pulling their punch in promoting " tolerance toward Jews and Israel."

What was objectionable about any of that?

No professional intelligence organization will confide the identities of its covert agents to another country, even if that country is a close ally.

It won't even reveal it to anyone without a need to know, within its own precincts. In the US that was brought home by Hanssen and Ames, Russian moles in the FBI and CIA.

Even when Turkey and Israel were getting along, there was no reason to closely identify the sources of information they may have been sharing.

If the Israelis identified some Iranian scientists to the Turks as Mossad assets, it conceivably was in anticipation of the Turks ratting them to Tehran and undermiing those men and their contribution to the mullah's nuclear effort.

I appreciate your sensible and sympathetic answer. And I am aware that Commentary has reason to be hyper cautious. But I have had the past experience, under the handle, Hugo Pirovano, of being told in an email from a Commentary host, that my posts were not going through because I spouted Nazi arguments.

Moreover, why has my day old comment on media bias, still not appeared? At this point they should have a handle on the various habitual posters and know whom to screen and whom not to screen.

Where is my comment? Why does the administrator use the excuse of reviewing my opinions, to suppress them? Why is Commentary so dishonest and spiteful and fiddling?

I don't understand why my comments on this issue, and on others, are again being made subject to approval from the administrator and are effectively, suppressed.

It is ridiculous to take any "bombshell" by Ignatius, at face value. The man is not to be trusted, not his facts, not his motivation and purpose.

Nor is it conceivable that Israel would have shared the identities of its operatives with Turkey (or anyone), even in times of deep friendship. And becoming aware that Turkey does have such information now when it is blatantly hostile,, it is inconceivable that Israel would not have immediately extracted its people.