President Obama claims that he is an "ardent believer" in the free market:

Contrary to the claims of some of my critics-and some of the editorial pages-I am an ardent believer in the free market. ...

Government has a vital, if limited, role to play in fostering sustained economic growth and creating the foundations for you to succeed.

Obama is definitely not a socialist in the sense that he believes in government takeover of private companies.  From Halliburton to McDonalds, from Exxon to Old Navy, Obama is not proposing government ownership.  The GM takeover, rather than being a contrary example, enforces the point, as the company was returned to private ownership.  GM went from Government Motors back to General Motors.  Obama is not proposing any form of government takeover of private industry.

But claiming that he sees that the legitimate role of government is limited to that of fostering economic growth is a deception of the first order.  Obama sees the role of government as that of ensuring everyone gets his fair share.  That is what his "you didn't build that" rant was all about.  While the Wright brothers used bicycle parts to build their airplane, they didn't invent or make the bicycle parts.

In short, Obama does not believe that the "hands off" private-enterprise, free-market system distributes wealth fairly.

But with that said, it is hard not to come to the conclusion that as far as Obama is concerned, his vision of social justice and supervised "hands on" capitalism cannot be successfully argued and sold to the American public.  In this he agrees with the Alinskyites, and indeed, the pedigree of this line of thinking goes back to the Fabian Socialists.  He can't package and sell his vision, but he knows he is right, so he is going to use subterfuge and sleight-of-hand to implement his vision.  In that, he is a grifter for social justice.

While publicly professing ardent admiration for the free market, Obama and his myrmidons are busy behind the scenes using the regulatory power of government to nudge its citizens to the land of the dependent and home of the drone.  Social justice regulations are smuggled in under banking regulations, under consumer protection regulations, under food and drug regulations, under commerce regulations.  ObamaCare is rife with social justice regulations.

Here are some headlines and opening passages  that openly use the term "sneak":

"Obama sneaking in legislation again to serve his own personal agenda":

Obama signed a defense policy bill today, and in the midst of that, slipped in hate crime legislation. The two are totally unrelated, and the fact that he used the defense policy to serve his own agenda is not only disrespectful to our military personnel, but also our country. In addition, I fear down the road it could be construed in such a way it would prevent us from defending the country against terrorism. If the language is in with this policy, it could be deemed applicable to our military combat against terrorists. True to typical behavior, Mr. Obama can't get support by any other means, so he goes behind our backs like a spoiled toddler trying to slip his hand in the cookie jar before dinner, hoping no one will catch him.

"Energy Department sneaks offshore moratorium past public. Jobs and oil-supply potential are shut down"

"Obama Sneaks Anti-Gun Laws Past Congress"

"Obama sneaks in UN Treaty by Executive Order"

"Sneaking end-of-life consultations into Obamacare"

"Obama's budget is a sneak attack on our Second Amendment ..."

Mitt Romney has raised the issue of Obama's secret intentions.  He told a group of newspaper editors recently that Obama "doesn't want to share his real plans before the election, either with the public or with the press, ... His intent is on hiding; you and I are going to have to do the seeking. ... He wants us to reelect him so we can find out what he'll actually do."

In a preview of Stanley Kurtz's forthcoming book, Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities, Ron Radosh is convinced that Kurtz is correct that a central goal of a second Obama term will be to incorporate suburbs and their wealth into city budgets by annexation.  The Obama team is convinced that those who make their money in business in the cities have no right to flee to the suburbs, take their money, and keep it in suburban schools and infrastructure.  It is racist and greedy.  As Kurtz points out, the plan must be carried out gradually, through stealth regulations and Orwellian language ("Sustainable Communities Initiative," "Building One America").  

Kurtz's claim is heavily documented, but as Radosh notes, such a plan could never be made public.  In other words, sneak the whole program past the American public and congress.

The man is a sneak.  There is no other word for it.