Obama Caught Fibbing About His Record On Regulations


Recently President Barack Obama claimed that he had “approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his.” To be certain, George W. Bush was no paragon of limited government virtue, but Obama’s statement if true would seem to undermine Republican claims that he’s a big government liberal.

But it turns out that Obama’s statement isn’t true. Like all the best lies, it takes a grain of truth and wraps it in a shroud of falsehood. The University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center notes that while George W. Bush did approve 45 more regulations than Obama did in his first term, the impact of Bush’s regulations were $4.2 billion. The impact of Obama’s regulations were $18.9 billion.

“It’s like saying I am better read than my friend because I read three vampire novels to his one War and Peace,” the video says. “I guess I could say that stuff, but it’d be pretty embarrassing.”

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters.

Related posts

  • Bat One

    Obama lied?  Why is this news?!

    • $8194357



      Strange how the law works. After 3 ½ years of cynical disregard for the borders, language, and culture of the United States, one would think that some 240 million people have suffered “sufficient personal harm” to claim legal standing for a crack at His Royal Highness in a court of law! There are only 30 million illegals currently residing in the United States, and those the Attorney General refers to as “his people” might actually lack legal standing in the eyes of an honest arbiter.

      At any rate, Democrats have finally admitted what the rest of us have known for quite some time. Barack Obama is NOT qualified to hold the job won for him by the national media in 2008. But it seems only the voters will have the authority to reclaim it from him. God willing, the vast majority who exercise that authority in November will be both American and alive.

  • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

    George W. Bush did approve 45 more regulations than Obama did in his first term…

    Fact.  How can a fact be a lie?

    Obama didn’t say he spent less, therefore there is not a lie. Only to the dimwitted adolescents could what Obama said be considered a lie.

    • factsarefacts

       4.2 Billion to 18.9 Billion. 

      To make it easier for you, it’s like saying that someone bought a lot of little diamonds from Zales while someone else bought a huge 18 Carrot diamond. 

      And this huge diamond cost a lot more. 

      That’s a fact.  Numbers don’t lie, but you can lie about the numbers.

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        But Obama didn’t lie about the numbers.  He smacked his conservative counterparts with the truth; that he implemented less regulation than bush.

        The conservative cry baby party likes to pretend that Obama’s regulations are more than any conservative in history ever passed, when we know the opposite to be true, bush was.

        • SportsDoc

           As my wife always said to our children growing up: If you withhold part of the truth, it is the same as a lie.

          But, that is common in politics, on both sides today. Just because it is common, doesn’t make it right, though.

          What I would hold Obama’s feet to the fire on in the end is his promise to be more transparent, a man of the people and “Change you can Believe in.” Instead, it’s the same old DC bullshit, and if anything, he is the least transparent President in history.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            But typically the complaint against regulations is separate from government spending.

            Obama properly addressed his critics who accuse him of implementing more regulations.

          • ‘Tom Crawford

            Hate to say it but Hann is right.

            This article / posting is wrong.

            Rob, points out in the what Obama stated was  “approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his.” in which Rob points out the following showing this to be correct:  The University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center notes that while George W. Bush did approve 45 more regulations than Obama did in his first term.

            The point in what Obama stated was he amount of regulations, and that wasn’t a lie – and sorry to say guys but Rob’s twisting of the truth to make it a lie is adding in the impact of the regulations which has NOTHING to do with what Obama stated on the amount of regulations.

            Obama didn’t lie, you twisted the facts to fit your narrative that he lied. There is much about this president that can be criticized, you shouldn’t have to make things up to fit a narrative of him lying. He didn’t. The number of regulations is less, and you stated such – it wasn’t a lie.

          • guest

            The truth of that matter is that Obama has put regulatoins over a greater part of our economy than Bush by 4 times.  He has attempted to regulate more of our economy than Bush ever dreamed of yet he claims that he doesn’t regulate much.

          • ‘Tom Crawford

            The University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center notes that while George W. Bush did approve 45 more regulations than Obama did in his first term.

            I am only dealing with the truth of his statement, which backed the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center’s information shows this to be a truthful statement he made.

            In dealing with JUST his statement and not twisting by adding the impact of those regulations (which had nothing to do if his statement was true or not).

          • DrEvil007

            This isn’t Government spending; this is the cost to individuals that these new regulations imposed.

          • ‘Tom Crawford

            BUT this article / post is not about costs or the impact of those regulations. The whole point in this article / posting was that Obama lied on HOW MANY regulations – and the whole point of this article is wrong on that point. Obama told the truth and the Center backs that up.

            If people want to dicuss the IMPACT of those regulations then that is fine, but it has NOTHING to do with this article.

        • DrEvil007

          Its called a lie of ommission because the implication is that his new regulations had less impact on the nation than his predessesor’s new regulations.  The opposite was true.  Its called nuance and its is called putting things in context. 

    • Gern Blanston

      Fact: W never said the war in Iraq was over when he had his ‘Mission Accomplished’ party.

  • Bat One

    The regulatory count comparison is (no surprise!) thoroughly disingenuous.  Neither Dodd-Frank nor Obamacare have had their separate tens of thousands of pages of implementing regulations published yet.

    Since Obama has no real accomplishments to point to in his increasingly Quixotic reelection campaign, he’s reduced to arguing that he’s not as bad as his predecessor.  Pathetic!

    • Gern Blanston

      Especially pathetic when you consider how hard they’ve tried to paint Bush as the worst president ever. Now we apparently need reminding that Obama’s not as bad as Bush – apparently the WH thinks there’s doubt out there.

      • Bat One

        “Pathetic” is what we get when the administration is struggling to find anything they can label an accomplishment.