Before kickoff yesterday, Fox News' Bill O'Reilly sat down with President Obama in a ten minute interview. When challenged on issues such as Benghazi, the IRS targeting conservatives, and ObamaCare, Obama seemed defensive, going so far as to blame Fox News.
The interview has been described as “testy,” “revealing,” “contentious.” Needless to say, O'Reilly challenged Obama on a number of issues that likely wouldn't have been brought up by other members of the Obama-mania media.
If you hadn't paid attention at all to the news for the last year, you would see this interview and believe that Obama's administration is in great shape, merely falling victim to a menacing news network that makes up stories and false narratives. Only we know that to be entirely untrue.
Let's start with ObamaCare. Obama defended HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius after O'Reilly questioned why she hadn't been fired. After all, our tax dollars are paying her salary and she had three years and over $600 million to build a healthcare website that went on to fail miserably. While Obama maintains that people are held accountable in his administration, apparently we have a different definition of accountable. After all, Kathleen Sebelius is still collecting a paycheck with our tax dollars.
While Obama tried to convince low-information voters that the website is now working fine, the news reports and polls would beg to differ. For example, did you see the Washington Post article, “HealthCare.gov can’t handle appeals of enrollment errors”? The author explains how the government is currently incapable of fixing the website's screw-ups. About 22,000 Americans have filed error reports, which are currently sitting idly in a government computer. Yet Obama is still trying to convince us that everything is just fine. He told O'Reilly: “The good news is that right away, we decided how are we going to fix it, it got fixed within a month and a half, it was up and running and now it's working the way it's supposed to and we've signed up three million people.” Working the way it's supposed to? Tell that to these 22,000 Americans.
Obama would not submit that “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor” was the biggest boondoggle of his presidency. Even though it was voted Lie of the Year and has severely damaged his credibility in the eyes of the public, either Obama didn't want to give O'Reilly the satisfaction of admitting it or he ignorantly believes he did everything he could. Obama explains, “This is one that I regret and I've said I regretted, in part because we put in a grandfather clause in the original law saying that, in fact, you were supposed to be able to keep it. It obviously didn’t cover everybody that we needed to and that's why we changed it, so that we further grandfathered in folks and many people who thought originally, when they got that cancellation notice, they couldn't keep it or not.”
While much of the Obama-mania media has failed to report updates or push for answers related to Benghazi, Obama was challenged on the issue. He essentially believes that the main takeaway from Benghazi is that we need to better protect our diplomats serving us in dangerous places. While there is no doubt that's the case, it doesn't answer the litany of other questions related to Benghazi.
One of the questions is why Obama and his administration touted for weeks that Benghazi was caused by a spontaneous protest as a result of a YouTube video when he know, in fact, that this was a lie. Not only was it a lie, but we know that Obama was told the truth almost immediately, yet he and members of his administration (Susan Rice, for example) went on to lie about it. O'Reilly challenged him on the issue, asking whether or not Obama refused to call it a terrorist attack because of his political campaign for president. Obama says that's the case because “folks like you are telling them that.” People believe it because we have no other explanation from this administration as to the truth.
Obama went on to say, “…we revealed to the American people exactly what we understood at the time. The notion that we would hide the ball for political purposes when, a week later, we all said, in fact, there was a terrorist attack taking place the day after, I said it was an act of terror, that wouldn't be a very good cover-up.” First of all, Obama did not call the attack in Benghazi an “act of terror” the day after it occurred. We went through this during the presidential debate when Candy Crowley attempted to, inaccurately, set the record straight. Also Obama wasn't telling the world it was a terrorist attack a week later. On September 25th, two weeks later, Obama went to the United Nations and blamed a YouTube video for the attack, making no mention of a terrorist attack. Obama is flat-out trying to change history, hoping that Americans watching this interview haven't really been paying attention.
Remember the days when Obama called the IRS targeting of conservatives “outrageous”? He said he had “no patience” for such violations and he would not tolerate it. That was in May 2013, just days after the scandal broke. Now he is singing a much different tune. Before O'Reilly could even get out the question about IRS employees targeting conservatives, Obama labeled it as “absolutely wrong.” Obama goes on to explain that we've had multiple hearings on the issue and seems to believe that it is case closed. In fact, he believes that the only reason the story still circulates is because of Fox News! Obama said, “... that's not what happened. They -- folks have, again, had multiple hearings on this. I mean these kinds of things keep on surfacing, in part because you and your TV station will promote them.” Obama then doubles down, going on to suggest that the IRS targeting wasn't a case of mass corruption, in fact there wasn't “even a smidgeon of corruption.”
Just days before being elected president in 2008, Obama declared, "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America." O'Reilly asked Obama why he feels it necessary to fundamentally transform our nation and Obama completely contradicts himself. He responded, "I don't think we need to fundamentally transform the nation.” Once O'Reilly reminded him that these were his words, Obama then used the platform to push for economic mobility, dovetailing his wealth inequality campaign quite nicely. Obama doesn't need to tell us his plans to fundamentally transform America because his actions say it all. We are becoming a nation of less prosperity, less freedom along with more government and more debt at the hands of a rigid ideologue.