Thanks to the new biography of our current chief executive by David Maraniss, Barack Obama: The Story, we now know that much of what our current chief executive us told us about his pre-White House life was, simply, false. Except that, if you had read the New York Times on July 14 of last year, you would have known that already--if you had read a story that the Times buried on p. 14, and then never followed up, that is.
Over at Commentary, Jonathan Tobin explains:
The fables Obama seems to have told about his alienation, his girlfriends and the rest of his over-intellectualized voyage of self-discovery [as detailed in the David Maraniss book] actually pale in comparison to the whopper he told when running for election in 2008 that his mother died because she had been denied coverage and treatment of her disease. [Janny] Scott [of the New York Times] revealed that in fact the expenses relating to her cancer had been paid by her insurance. Though she had a separate and totally unrelated dispute relating to disability coverage, Scott’s research proved that Obama’s statement during the 2008 presidential debate was fiction:
"For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that."
It bears repeating that the president knew this account was false because he served as his mother’s attorney in all her dealings with the insurance company.
When the Times ran that story (on page 14 rather than on the front page), the White House chose not to deny the truth of Scott’s reporting. But that didn’t stop the Obama campaign from refloating the same falsehoods about Ms. Dunham having perished for lack of insurance coverage in an autobiographical campaign film narrated by Tom Hanks. Not only has the president never apologized for lying to the American people about his mother’s plight, he rightly assumed that even though the truth was uncovered by the New York Times, neither that paper nor the rest of the mainstream media would follow up on it as they undoubtedly would had a Republican ever tried to sell the voters such a transparent whopper.
The President of the United States is a purveyor of blatant untruths, and the New York Times knows it. As tidy an instance as you could ever hope to see of the morality of the left: As long as it advances politically correct aims, anything at all is permissible.