President Obama has recently dismissed the Inspector General of AmeriCorps, Gerald Walpin.  The dismissal proceeds an investigation conducted by Walpin in which Kevin Johnson (the mayor of Sacramento and political ally of Barack Obama) and the St. HOPE Academy (a non-profit education group led by Kevin Johnson) were found using government funds for personal and political reasons; Johnson even used some of the funds to have people wash his car. In light of these findings, Johnson and the St. Hope Academy were forced to repay half of the $847,000 in grants they received from AmeriCorps.
By law, the President must provide the Congress with an explanation for the dismissal an Inspector General, Fox News reports:
In the letter, White House Special Counsel Norman Eisen wrote that Walpin was "confused" and "disoriented" at a May board meeting, was "unduly disruptive," and exhibited a "lack of candor" in providing information to decision makers. 
But, for some reason, none of Obama's defenders at DP seem concerned with Mr. Walpin's mental status (they havenít' really mentioned it), instead they're more interested - if they're even interested at all - in Walpin's political motivations, despite the fact that he wasn't dismissed for this reason.
So, was Obama justified in firing Walpin or has he committed yet another wrong his loving supporters are loathe to defend?
I, for one, am shocked. Not shocked that Obama is continuing the culture of corruption and cronyism in Washington - that's a given - just shocked that he could do it so blatantly and with so little criticism or scrutiny.
Before you vote, be sure to read the previous discussions concerning Obama's firing of Walpin:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pol...-doing-so.html (Obama fires IG for investigating supporter, breaks law in doing so.)
 - Ousted AmeriCorps watchdog defends waste probe
 - Fired IG Calls White House Explanation 'Baseless,' Says He's Being Targeted - Political News - FOXNews.com