• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

It is also interesting to note this:

CREW has a reputation for being sticklers and they file complaints against both Republicans and Democrats.

Congressional Ethics | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

FWIW, CREW is an unabashedly liberal organization:

"We are progressive," said Naomi Seligman, the group's deputy director and communications director. "We do work within a larger progressive infrastructure." Seligman suggested her group is the progressive counterweight to Judicial Watch.

Melanie Sloan serves as CREW's Executive Director. Prior to starting CREW in 2003, she served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the District of Columbia. Before becoming a prosecutor, Ms. Sloan served as Minority Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, working on criminal justice issues for then-Ranking Member John Conyers (D-MI). Ms. Sloan also served as Counsel for the Crime Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by then-Representative Charles Schumer (D-NY).

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archi...-20-most-corrupt-members-congress-report.html
 
Right...if you break the law because you believe it's legal, you'll be prosecuted. But if you DON'T break the law even when you believe you are, then you aren't prosecuted.

As far as I can tell, there's no way that a quid pro quo could have existed, which means no crime was committed even if someone (incorrectly) offered the job as a quid pro quo.

Sestaks own words were that he was offered a job in exchange for dropping out of the race.

That's an indictment by his words,... not mine.

As as a matter of fact and law,... whether the position offered is a paid position or not is another issue.

Clearly the the person offering the position thought it had value,... else there would be no use in making the offer in an effort to win the desired outcome.

The laws against seeling political offices, favors, etc.... are not based upon how much the intended target stood to gain.

It's more like zero tolerance.

You can't (legally) promise or offer ANYTHING of value towards having an affect on the political outcome or participation of an election.

Period.

Not money, not a cabinet position, greater influence,.... nothing.
 

Know what RH?

Never heard of any of this during the Bush years because the press never reported it.
If there was something they would have put down the hammer hard.
Even used forged documents if they could.

Do you have any links besides Moonbat Kucinich?
BTW, I like Kucinich... (you read that correctly) because he did what Obama and most Dems never do.

I like Kucinich because he tells people precisely how he wants to screw America and turn her into Amerika.

That is how our process should be, but Libs cannot do it because Americans never vote for Scoialist claptrap when openly offered.

I can even say I respect Kucinich for it though I disagree with him 100%. I cannot say I respect many other Dems/Socialists because they are dishonest and duplicitous to the core. Gulf War II revealed the depths they would sink... so low in fact there is no mechanism to cap the damage they had done.

Now, back to Obama (President Top Kill), Sestak, ObamaRhama and their latest mutt in this affair... Cliton, and how they violated Federal Law by offering Sestak a position to pull out of the race with Specter.

.
 
Last edited:
Actually the majority of the things they file complaints too are Republicans, and democrats who have republican vlaue. And are mostly attacking the ones who oppose Crew, so basically they are having the same thing done to them.

Watchdog, Donors Share Common Foes - Roll Call

However I don't mind that their is a watchdog group it is just that they aren't truly bipartisan when they go for mostly democrats with some Republican values.


While I agree, most of their actions are against Republicans, they are not above hitting Democrats.

Mary Landrieu: CREW FILES COMPLAINT OVER
Action taken that includes Nader: CREW FILES FEC COMPLAINT AGAINST CITIZENS FOR A SOUND ECONOMY, OREGON FAMILY COUNCIL, NADER FOR PRESIDENT 2004 AND BUSH-CHENEY | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Nader alone: CREW FILES FEC AND IRS COMPLAINTS AGAINST NADER FOR PRESIDENT 2004 AND CITIZEN WORKS | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Former Rep. Jefferson: CREW FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN REP. JEFFERSON APPEAL | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
This one is against the Obama administration: CREW FILES AMICUS BRIEFS IN TWO FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD FOIA DISCLOSURE CASES | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
John Edwards Campaign: CREW FILES 9TH CIRCUIT AMICUS BRIEF SUPPORTING PROHIBITION AGAINST CONDUIT CONTRIBUTIONS | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

Apparently, they like to challenge the Obama administration:

CREW seeks evidence of DOJ’s ability to handle allegations of government wrongdoing, to inform the public and hold the government accountable.: CREW FILES DOJ FOIA REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON CRIMINAL DIVISION'S HANDLING OF GUANTANAMO DEATHS | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW executive director Melanie Sloan said, “It is impossible to understand why the government hasn’t already made the video feed and other records documenting the impact of the spill public. CREW AND GREENPEACE SEEK VIDEO FEEDS AND GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS RELATED TO GULF OIL SPILL | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW FILES FOIA REQUESTS WITH EIGHT AGENCIES FOR DOCUMENTS ABOUT THEIR LOBBYING OF CONGRESS ON FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM CREW FILES FOIA REQUESTS WITH EIGHT AGENCIES FOR DOCUMENTS ABOUT THEIR LOBBYING OF CONGRESS ON FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

Today, CREW sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Department of the Treasury, to discover whether in the late 1990s, while at the New York Fed, Tim Geithner took action beneficial to AIG. CREW SENDS FOIA TO TREASURY DEPARTMENT | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW seeks to learn the extent to which the Labor Department is aware of Talx’s actions and has taken any action in response. CREW FILES FOIAS WITH LABOR DEPT. FOR RECORDS ON TALX CORP.

There are many more like those but let's move on:

CREW CALLS FOR REP. MURTHA TO STEP DOWN FROM DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
CREW CALLS FOR REP. MURTHA TO STEP DOWN FROM DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW ASKS OCE TO INVESTIGATE REP. HARMAN IMMEDIATELY CREW ASKS OCE TO INVESTIGATE REP. HARMAN IMMEDIATELY | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW CALLS FOR ETHICS INVESTIGATION INTO NEW ALLEGATIONS OF WRONGDOING BY REP. RANGEL CREW CALLS FOR ETHICS INVESTIGATION INTO NEW ALLEGATIONS OF WRONGDOING BY REP. RANGEL | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW SENDS COMPLAINT AGAINST REP. MAHONEY TO HOUSE ETHICS COMMITTEE CREW SENDS COMPLAINT AGAINST REP. MAHONEY TO HOUSE ETHICS COMMITTEE | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW SENDS HOUSE ETHICS COMPLAINT AGAINST REP. LAURA RICHARDSON CREW SENDS HOUSE ETHICS COMPLAINT AGAINST REP. LAURA RICHARDSON | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW URGES REP. WYNN TO RESIGN NOW CREW URGES REP. WYNN TO RESIGN NOW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

There are more, but I think that makes my point.
 
I do not understand what is so difficult to understand.

Sestak said the White House offerred him a job TO PULL OUT OF THE RACE WITH SPECTER.

THAT IS PLAINLY A CRIME UNDER 18 USC 600.

I will keep posting the following until you lefties succumb.
Sestak is his and Obama's worst enemy in this.
It does not matter what type of job either.
There was a job offerred to him to leave the race.

I believe the position offered having no salary, or worth, has an impact here.

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit...

The law may not look at leaving a salaried "job" as a Congressman to take a non salaried position as a "benefit".
 
Zimmer, this is a list of all the things that happen during the bush years
Bush administration scandals - SourceWatch

LOL good try... This isn't about the Bush Administration... this is about Obama and Sestak.

The most critical evidence to run a Grand Jury on this has already been let out of the bag.
The man offered the job himself and his admitting the White House did the offering to get him out of the race.

.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I know I was just given you a source for the scandals he had during his admiration. I just don't think Mr Obama did anything wrong.
 
I believe the position offered having no salary, or worth, has an impact here.



The law may not look at leaving a salaried "job" as a Congressman to take a non salaried position as a "benefit".

LOL... read Sestak's and Kane's interview, a "high level" job was offered.

It does not matter what job was offered... the job was offered so as to get him out of the race.
That is a violation of 18 USC 600.

Just as it did not matter that sex with Lewinsky was embarrassing to admit under oath... the law is the law.

They broke it.

Now it is for the legal system to handle. The train left the station with Sestek's admission in the Kane interview. Kane knew it... Sestak didn't... until it was too late.

.
 
LOL... read Sestak's and Kane's interview, a "high level" job was offered.

It does not matter what job was offered... the job was offered so as to get him out of the race.
That is a violation of 18 USC 600.

Just as it did not matter that sex with Lewinsky was embarrassing to admit under oath... the law is the law.

They broke it.

Now it is for the legal system to handle. The train left the station with Sestek's admission in the Kane interview. Kane knew it... Sestak didn't... until it was too late.

.
stick a fork in this one. the faux outrage has been found out
maybe it's time to turn the indignation to something about sarah having an unadoring author dare to live in the rental home next door
ooops, that one has been put to rest also
no doubt faux news will rustle up something else to incite its koolaid klatch
 
I believe the position offered having no salary, or worth, has an impact here.



The law may not look at leaving a salaried "job" as a Congressman to take a non salaried position as a "benefit".

WH Counsel said the same thing, but I don't see how that's possibly true as applied to all possible charges. The fact that something does not come with an additional pecuniary benefit does not mean that it cannot be considered something of value.
 
LOL... read Sestak's and Kane's interview, a "high level" job was offered.

It does not matter what job was offered
... the job was offered so as to get him out of the race.
That is a violation of 18 USC 600.

Just as it did not matter that sex with Lewinsky was embarrassing to admit under oath... the law is the law.

They broke it.

Now it is for the legal system to handle. The train left the station with Sestek's admission in the Kane interview. Kane knew it... Sestak didn't... until it was too late.

Actually, it matters very much. The decision to go any further "legally" with this will very much depend on the words in the specific law pertaining to this, not emotional partisan rhetoric.

It's value will most certainly come into play. And the only testimony that will matter will be that given under oath, not in an interview.

This won't be going anywhere.
 
Some background on Drew Zahn the WND News Editor who wrote the blog article.

According to his website - Storycraft Communications

He's a "author, editor, speaker, guest preacher, and home-educating father of twelve."

In addition to the many WND articles he's written, Drew also has two books (both looking for publishers) and 1 play:


Where Art Thou, Romeo?

In this two-act play, written for teenage and community
theater groups, young Hamlet has lost his dog, Romeo. With
the help of a cast of Shakespeare characters from several of
the Bard's plays and a tongue-in-cheek spoof on all that is
Shakespearean, Hamlet sets out in search of Romeo. On a
dark night, however, he is confronted by Romeo's ghost,
who not only confirms that he was "dognapped," but also
that he was poisoned. Through a series of famous
Shakespearean scenes, Hamlet and his friends set out in
search of the culprit, in what becomes a clue-ridden who-
done-it. As the play shifts from scene to scene, two film
critics (Siskelette and Eberta) provide running commentary
and comic relief, helping the audience—especially those less
versed in Shakespeare's works—recognize the parody in the
play's scenes. "Where Art Thou, Romeo?" was accepted for
performance by the Hearts and Homes Theater Group of
Boone, Iowa, for performance in 2008.

What would Jesus think of a partisan hack troll, writing angry little attack pieces for a fringe website like WND?

And Shakespeare just upchucked in his grave...

The Hearts and Home Theater group presents "Where art Thou, Romeo?" One Nite Only!! Well, we know twelve people who had to sit though that performance. 13 if you count his wife.
 
nothing there explains illegality

From what I understand (which probably isn't much) the position offered to Sestak was unpaid, therefore the offer was not technically "illegal".
It certainly sounds shady, though.
I fail to understand why the Obama would want Spector to win.
I thought Arlen Spector was kind of... conservative.
Is he now Obama's bitch, or what?

I don't know. i'm a simple, uneducated person.
This is all beyond my ability to comprehend.
I just want Obama to end the war, stop the oil leak, reduce unemployment, and provide some sort of medical insurance that my family can afford.
I hope everybody doesn't get too sidetracked by this.
We need to focus on the things that matter.
My interpretation of this situation is that it's political business-as-usual.
I thought this was just how things worked, in the political world.
Of course, it's rare that we actually find out about it, but I doubt it's rare that it happens.
 
Last edited:
They should imprison GW Bush for starting a war on false information before they do anything on this EXTREMELY weak BS. This is the crap Hannity and the other salespeople beat their drums about and poison the minds of Americans. SImply because for a republican Obama = bad. No matter what. If Obama is doing good things, make him look bad, if he isnt doing anything, make him look bad, and if he really is doing something bad, make him look bad.

This BS in AMerica must stop. We as a Country waste FAR too much time and energy on spin-politics. On propaganda.
 
Obama can.
Can't he?
Oops!.

It seems even republican experts agree, that nothing illegal happened, thus just another excuse to attack Obama... for anything. :roll:

Law prof Hasen slams Fox's "breathless" Sestak coverage, dismantles criminality arguments
Hasen: "The coverage that I've seen" on Fox has been "pretty breathless," but allegations "much ado about nothing." During an interview on Fox's On the Record immediately following the Hannity program, Loyola law professor Richard Hasen commented, "The coverage that I've seen on your network sounds pretty breathless. It seems to me that this is really much ado about nothing."
Hasen: "I can't find a case" where statute "has ever been applied in this way." Discussing 18 U.S.C. § 600,

Hasen stated: HASEN: I went back and looked at this Section 600, the one that says about these job offers. That seems to be a statute that's really aimed at preventing patronage appointments. That is, you know, giving people who have done political favors for you jobs where they make money. I can't find a case where it's ever been applied in this way, and I think there are some good reasons why it probably shouldn't be. What we have here, really, is a political deal. It's a deal to say in order to strengthen the party, one of the two people competing should step aside. It's the kind of thing that happens all the time, and it's the kind of thing that probably is not what the statute was really designed to prevent.

Justice Department Public Integrity lawyer Zeidenberg: "Horrible precedent" to treat "horsetrading" "in the criminal context." In a May 25 post, Talking Points Memo's Zachary Roth quoted Peter Zeidenberg, a former federal prosecutor with the Justice Department's Public Integrity unit, saying "Talk about criminalizing the political process!... It would be horrible precedent if what really truly is political horsetrading were viewed in the criminal context of: is this a corrupt bribe?"

Bush political director Kaufman: "Tell me a White House that didn't do this, back to George Washington." The New York Times reported that Ron Kaufman, who served as President George H.W. Bush's White House political director, "said it would not be surprising for a White House to use political appointments to accomplish a political goal. 'Tell me a White House that didn't do this, back to George Washington,' Mr. Kaufman said."

Wash. Post: "[E]thics laws do not seem designed for this circumstance." In a May 25 editorial, The Washington Post stated: "Would it be illegal? Mr. Specter said so, but ethics laws do not seem designed for this circumstance. Ordinarily, bribery takes place in the opposite direction: Government officials aren't usually the ones offering something of value. Other statutes prohibit officials from using their power to interfere in an election, or to, directly or indirectly, promise a job as 'reward for any political activity.' But these have been understood to prevent official coercion, not criminalize horse-trading."
Hannity devotes show to discredited claim that Sestak job discussion was illegal | Media Matters for America

To persue this simply exposes how desperate Repubs are.

As my right wing friends like to say,
"There's nothing to see here folks. Just move on."
:lol:
 
It seems even republican experts agree, that nothing illegal happened, thus just another excuse to attack Obama... for anything. :roll:

Hannity devotes show to discredited claim that Sestak job discussion was illegal | Media Matters for America

To persue this simply exposes how desperate Repubs are.

As my right wing friends like to say,
"There's nothing to see here folks. Just move on."
:lol:
ROTFLOL. Yuz folks is darn funny, ya'll know that, dontcha?

Republicans are desperate???... ROTFLMFAO... we don't have an utter stooge in office, with as big a dope on deck, and the model twit in the hole. Three Strikes Law should apply here... LOL

First I would like to thank Congressman Sestak and Larry Kane for blowing this baby open, and the would further like to thank the Obama Administration for sticking their collective dicks in the ground to make it worse. They are big dicks and have made a big hole to slither out of...LOL

What Media Matters deep mining operation brings to the surface is meaningless.
What matters is 18 USC 600 and what Congressman Sestak stated so freely and quickly in February.
Add to that what their twit lawyer team came out with on Friday.The Dumb and Dumber Administration.

“When you get out there and say, ‘We’re going to do things totally different, we’re above all this and we’re going to be totally transparent,’ they cause their own problem because they’re not being transparent.”

Barack Hussein Obama

"Werdz, just werdz."

Can you say "Horse-Hockey"?
The Dems opened the door wide with Bob Bauer's statement before the long weekend.
Sometimes you just have to thank God for moronic enemies (and these folks are enemies of the people).

White House admits effort to keep Sestak out of Senate Race
White House admits effort to keep Sestak out of Senate race - CNN.com
DUMB!

Low-level, mid-level, high-level... doesn't matter a whit.
What matters is Sestak (plus those that drove the bargain) and 18 USC 600.

When Mr. Gibbs was pressed on the matter Thursday, he resolutely referred to his original statement exonerating the White House and refused to elaborate.

“But you never really explained what the conversation was,” said Jake Tapper of ABC News.

“And I don’t have anything to add today,” Mr. Gibbs said.

“But,” Mr. Tapper continued, “if the White House offers a congressman a position in the administration in order to convince that congressman not to run for office ...”

“I don’t have anything to add to that,” Mr. Gibbs said.

Mr. Tapper persisted: “But do you really think the American people don’t have a right to know about what exactly the conversation was?”

“I don’t have anything to add to what I said in March,” Mr. Gibbs said.

The White House had nothing more to say Monday. David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser, said on CNN, “I don’t think any questions will be left unanswered on this,”

Did they hire a parrot as Press Secretary? Seems so.
And I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to addAnd I don’t have anything to add

Hmmm. Lots of very simple questions left unanswered.
What was that quote by Obama above... ROTFLMFAO...

LINK: YouTube - Singin' in the Rain - A Clockwork Orange

.
 
Last edited:
The only reason this is still kicking is because Obama's team handled it so poorly. They acted like they had something to hid so, the Repubs' talking heads have run with it. Hell, it they act guilty, the Repukes can use the distraction to maybe discredit, or put off, the real work Obama has to do.

It's obvious this statute was not written for this situation. There was no quid pro quo here. This is truly "politics as usual". Your Trickle Down Ronnie did it. Your treasonist hero dubya did it.

Enjoy it while it lasts. It's all you guys have. Another window into just how sad Republicans truly are these days.
:2wave:
 
The only reason this is still kicking is because Obama's team handled it so poorly.


Handled it poorly?

I guess you could say admitting to a felony is handling it poorly. :lamo
 
The only reason this is still kicking is because Obama's team handled it so poorly. They acted like they had something to hid so, the Repubs' talking heads have run with it. Hell, it they act guilty, the Repukes can use the distraction to maybe discredit, or put off, the real work Obama has to do.

It's obvious this statute was not written for this situation. There was no quid pro quo here. This is truly "politics as usual". Your Trickle Down Ronnie did it. Your treasonist hero dubya did it.

Enjoy it while it lasts. It's all you guys have. Another window into just how sad Republicans truly are these days.
:2wave:

Ed Rendell told us how it is done.
It is not how Obama did it.

Hence a full load hit the fan...
Hence it took the White House 15 hours to respond to Larry Kane's question...
Hence the Shock and Awe from Larry Kane...
Hence the months of delay hoping it would go away with the assistance of their media buddies......
Hence the lame response from Sestek after months of answering... WHITE HOUSE JOB OFFER, and I AM HONEST
Hence the dumping a response (admission of guilt) before the long weekend...

I think a lot of Bitter Clingers are watching and wondering why Obi (aka Mr. Transparent) and his Boyz are being so coy now.

.
 
Last edited:
Handled it poorly?

I guess you could say admitting to a felony is handling it poorly. :lmao

But again, Crunchy, what law has been broken? What "promise", directly or indirectly, was made to Congressman Sestek if he dropped out of the PA Democratic Senate race? Show me where former Pres. Clinton actually made an assurance to Congressman Sestek guaranteeing him a White House position and I will jump on that impeachment bandwagon same as I'd jump on that NBC bandwagon. Provide the proof!

A job offer is different from a promise - a guarantee - for said job. Sure, it's splitting hairs, but that's the grey area the law provides. It's the same as Rush saying "he'd move to Costa Rica." It's not what he meant, but it certainly trumped reality. Same here. The only reasons this issue has gained so much traction is because:

a) the current political fallout from the gulf oil spill;

b) Sestek continued to talk about it especially as the PA Democratic primaries began to really take off; and,

c) Obama's promise of transparency and changing the culture of DC.

Without these situations the Sestek issue becomes a non-issue much as it was before the PA Primaries. The irony is it seems the Republican party has latched onto the so-called Democratic montra, "Never waste a good crisis." :roll:
 
Last edited:
But again, Crunchy, what law has been broken? What "promise", directly or indirectly, was made to Congressman Sestek if he dropped out of the PA Democratic Senate race? Show me where former Pres. Clinton actually made an assurance to Congressman Sestek guaranteeing him a White House position and I will jump on that impeachment bandwagon same as I'd jump on that NBC bandwagon. Provide the proof!

A job offer is different from a promise - a guarantee - for said job. Sure, it's splitting hairs, but that's the grey area the law provides. It's the same as Rush saying "he'd move to Costa Rica." It's not what he meant, but it certainly trumped reality. Same here. The only reasons this issue has gained so much traction is because:

a) the current political fallout from the gulf oil spill;

b) Sestek continued to talk about it especially as the PA Democratic primaries began to really take off; and,

c) Obama's promise of transparency and changing the culture of DC.

Without these situations the Sestek issue becomes a non-issue much as it was before the PA Primaries. The irony is it seems the Republican party has latched onto the so-called Democratic montra, "Never waste a good crisis." :roll:

But again unobjective voice, we have Sestek's own words...... he was offered a "high level job" to leave the election. We have the White house statement confirming that Sestek was telling the truth for the last few months, regardless of the spin they are trying to give it. We have a direct violation of 18 USC 600 that doesn't leave much wiggle room for Bill, Rahm, and Barry whether it was a job or an unpaid position. We have the White house statement that admits to a felony..... read it yourself in the context of 18 USC 600.

What we don't have yet is a special prosecutor, and if one isn't appointed willingly by this administration, they will be tried in the court of public opinion and that will be reflected in the polls next November.

This is even more blatant bribery than what went on in the Obamacare vote….. That too is going to be remembered come November.
 
I have been following this thead, and now I will make my comment. I will not defend Obama for what he did, as some of his defenders are doing, but I will not blow everything out of proportion either, like some others are doing.

Here is the crux of the law - Any offer given must have an intrinsic value to it. Clinton's offer to get Sestak to drop out of the race was an UNPAID position, and that is the key here. This is not any more an impeachable offense than Ronald Regan making the exact same kind of an offer to Senator Hayakawa in 1982. It was completely legal then, and it is still completely legal now.

However, having said that, what about the ethics angle? I believe that this attempt to get Sestak to drop out is highly unethical. Of course, Obama can point the finger at Reagan if he wants to, but it does not change the fact that Obama did something that he had promised to clean up, while running for president - That is, the culture of corruption in Washington. Now that he has been in office a while, we see that Obama is now part of the establishment, not any kind of an outsider who is going to change things. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

You know, a lot of Republicans are calling this Obama's achilles heel, but I beg to differ with them. The achilles heel belongs to the Republican party, and it is the GOP which has shot themselves in the foot, once again. Republicans could have been honest in the portrayal of this incident, and would have had excellent ammunition to use against Obama. But, like the deather issue they repeatedly raised during the health care debate, they have made up the rules as they went along, and as a result, there is a real danger that an otherwise viable complaint will be lumped in with the deathers and birthers.

You can give credit to the GOP for health care passing. They lied about it so much, when they could have told the truth, which might have led to the bill's defeat. Now the same thing may very well happen to the issue of Obama's ethical lapses. A clear issue may very well become just another band of white noise, and nobody will listen. If the issue of Obama's lack of ethics never gets to first base, you can give credit to the GOP for that too. Two outs and the bases loaded, and Republicans pop out into foul territory once again.
 
Back
Top Bottom