creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Phyllis Schlafly
Phyllis Schlafly
26 Aug 2014
The Dead-End Road Called Pre-K

After President Obama in his 2013 State of the Union address called for a new federal entitlement for taxpayer-… Read More.

19 Aug 2014
Faulty Ideas About Marriage

Political junkies will remember how former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels was being groomed to run for president … Read More.

12 Aug 2014
Common Core's Growing Unpopularity

The highly acclaimed school standards called Common Core are becoming so unpopular that they may soon be … Read More.

Obama Bogged Down by Scandals

Comment

Increasing public disapproval of Barack Obama is based on more than his extravagant spending, which hangs debt like an albatross around the necks of our children and grandchildren. He is presiding over the most scandal-ridden administration in decades, from Colombia to Las Vegas to the Mexican border to Solyndra and more.

The Secret Service's prostitution party in Colombia is an international embarrassment. It's not sufficient punishment that a few guilty men have been allowed to resign or retire with benefits because many questions are still crying to be answered.

Who arranged the party at the now notorious Pley Club in Cartagena, Colombia, which apparently supplied enough girls for 11 Secret Service and 10 U.S. military men staying in separate rooms at the historic Hotel Caribe, where prostitution is openly tolerated?

Is there any connection between this moral scandal and our recent trade agreement with Colombia? Were there any similar parties to con the United States into going along with this free-trade deal that's favorable to Colombia?

Another embarrassing scandal is the General Services Administration's $823,000 junket to Las Vegas. Obama administration bureaucrats apparently think parties are perks that go along with their jobs.

Living high on the hog, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has been charging the Pentagon $32,000 per flight to jet to California every few weeks. And don't forget the half-billion-dollar gift to Solyndra before it filed for bankruptcy and left U.S. taxpayers on the hook.

"Fast and Furious" turned out to be a bloody scandal after the U.S. Justice Department OK'd the sale of guns to Mexican drug cartels, under the ridiculous excuse that this would give us the opportunity to get more information about the drug dealers. Somebody should be held accountable for the fact that one of these U.S. guns was used to murder U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Operation Fast and Furious allowed over 2,000 weapons to be smuggled to the violent Mexican drug cartels. A new book by investigative journalist Katie Pavlich called "Fast and Furious: Barack Obama's Bloodiest Scandal and its Shameless Cover-up," asserts that a third gun was involved whose existence was covered up by the FBI and the Justice Department.

Another scandal is that the Obama administration is suing several states. We need more aggressive 10th Amendment advocates to publicize and overturn these travesties.

Obama is suing Arizona to try to knock out its law to protect its citizens against illegal aliens, a law that polls show Americans support by 2 to 1.

The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments this week.

The Arizona law allows local law enforcement to question the legal status of anyone who is stopped on suspicion of a crime and then detain anyone who cannot prove legal U.S. residency. Illegal immigration is already a federal crime, and the Arizona law is an attempt to do some enforcement that the feds are failing to do.

The Obama administration wants the courts to prevent the states from enforcing laws that Obama refuses to enforce. Similar lawsuits have been filed against Alabama, Georgia and Utah.

In the Supreme Court case against Arizona, nine states have filed amicus briefs supporting Arizona, including Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma and South Carolina. They say they "have a manifest interest in ensuring that their sovereignty is accorded proper respect," and that each state should be able to decide for itself how to protect its citizens from the crime and costs associated with illegal aliens.

Amicus briefs from foreign governments opposing the Alabama and Georgia laws were filed by Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Peru. We need federal and state laws to prevent our courts from considering foreign laws, treaties, court decisions, or briefs in interpreting U.S. laws.

It looks as if voter fraud is one of the ways that Barack Obama plans to be re-elected in November. He has had his Justice Department block Texas and South Carolina laws that require showing a photo ID in order to vote, even though polls report that 70 percent of Americans support voter ID.

In defending Texas' law, Gov. Rick Perry said it "requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane." At least eight states have passed similar laws, and even the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Arizona's 2004 ballot initiative requiring voters to show photo ID in order to vote.

The Constitution makes it a major duty of the president to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Despite the fact the Defense of Marriage Act is the law of the land, passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, Obama is instead ordering his Justice Department not to defend this law in court.

Phyllis Schlafly is a lawyer, conservative political analyst and author of 20 books. Her latest, written with co-author Suzanne Venker, is "The Flipside of Feminism" published by WorldNetDaily. She can be contacted by e-mail at phyllis@eagleforum.org. To find out more about Phyllis Schlafly and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM



Comments

8 Comments | Post Comment
I was well aware of most of these scandals, but the suing the states one is new to me. Well done. These scandals will never get the media attention owed to them, but every little bit helps.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:57 PM
The Bush administration made uncovering voter fraud the prime task of their US attorneys, even firing the ones who had the temerity to point out that 1. their was no evidence of widespread voter fraud and 2. the hunt for the non-existent problem was a distraction from their job of dealing with real crime. The big push on voter fraud by the US attorneys found NO EVIDENCE OF SIGNIFICANT VOTER FRAUD. Why the push to pursue non-existent fraud instead of actual crime? How else do you justify laws intended to disenfranchise democratic voters?
.
Who gets disenfranchised? Primarily students, poor, and minority voters. These groups are less likely to have the specified ID. Gosh, which party do these groups tend to vote for? Are all such voters disenfranchised? Of course not. Just enough to shift the election results toward the GOP candidate. How obvious is the attempt? The law in Texas was written to exclude two groups from the ID requirement; the elderly and gun owners. Gosh, which party do you think these folks tend to vote for? Could it be any more obvious?
.
All lovers of liberty should be disgusted by these blatant attempts to disenfranchise voters. Does Phyllis really think so little of her readers that she willingly pushes the "voter fraud is going to be used to elect Obama lie?" Or does she, and many others in the GOP leadership, simply realize that the GOP has become so extreme on many issues that they will likely lose at the ballet box in a fair election?
Comment: #2
Posted by: Mark
Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:34 AM
Of course. Blame Bush to try and cover up Obama's scandals. Trying to make Obama out as the lesser of 2 evils, still makes him evil.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:10 AM
Chris,
It is ALWAYS the lesser of two evils. Anyone that is truly well suited to do the job will not survive the corporate vetting process in either party. I am not thrilled with Obama; I just think that any of the GOP offerings, with the possible exception of John Huntsman, would be much worse. I am appalled, for example, by Obama's belief that it is okay for a president to order the assassination of an American citizen on foreign soil WITHOUT any judicial review of the decision. (Funny, not a word on that one from the Romney camp. Somehow I doubt that he will reverse that decision if he is elected.)
.
I am not blaming Bush, just pointing out that even with GOP control of the administration and a huge effort, ordered by the White House, to uncover voter fraud, NO EVIDENCE of significant voter fraud was uncovered. If I said that the justice department under Obama did not find such evidence, conservatives would, quite logically, just say that he might not be looking very hard. But Bush really wanted to find such evidence and pushed hard for it. It simply was not there. So we are now left with an ongoing huge push on the part of the GOP to pass laws to solve a claimed problem that isn't there. So if the problem of voter fraud isn't real, why the push to set up impediments to voting? Could it be that the problem that Rick Perry is trying to solve is is not voter fraud but that too many supporters of democratic candidates showing up to vote? How else does one explain the exception for elderly and gun owners? If the GOP doesn't think that they can win on the issues, shouldn't they rethink their positions instead?
.
Does Obama have scandals? Yes, but no more that the typical president. I'll take the secret service stupidity over war crimes, Abu Graib, etc. any time.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Mark
Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:02 PM
Mark, you bring up a good point. Even if Romney wins the election, he won't repeal the NDAA or any other legislation that gives the government, especailly the executive branch, more power. Its all one big power grab to them. If Romney took a stance against the patriot act and NDAA he would gain A LOT of support, but power is the one sacred cow that is valued by both parties.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:04 AM
Re: Mark

"Who gets disenfranchised? Primarily students, poor, and minority voters. These groups are less likely to have the specified ID."

Of course, there is no evidence of significant numbers of such disenfranchised people, either, but that won't stop you from making the claim.

Let's look at your assertion. Students? I know of no accredited college in the US that lets people enroll without proving their identity. They certainly can't get any state of federal tuition assistance without it.

Poor and minority voters? Proof of eligibility to work in the US is required before anyone can be hired by an employer. You can't prove that without proving your identity. Same goes for welfare or unemployment benefits. I'm pretty sure that all those "poor and minority voters" either have jobs or are collecting some sort of benefits.

Except, of course, for the ones who are here illegally.

The idea that there is no widespread voter fraud in America is ludicrous. Ever heard the phrase "Vote early and often"? How about references to the dead voting? Those didn't become cliches overnight. There's been a pattern of ballot-stuffing by Democrats in this country for at least the last 150 years.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Jeff Gunn
Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:58 PM
Jeff,
If the idea that there is no widespread voter fraud in America is ludicrous, then why wasn't the Bush administration able to find it? They pushed their US Attorneys to make finding widespread voter fraud a top priority, but did not find it. Why does the Texas law accept a concealed weapons permit as ID, but not student IDs? Disenfranchisement may be too strong a term for what the GOP is up to, but manipulating the vote is not.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Mark
Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:28 AM
I might have an answer for the conceiled carry permit question. Most student IDs only have a students name and student number. Most CW permits have date of birth, describing info, and a host of other information. It makes perfect sense why a student ID is only good on campus. It dosen't even prove your age.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:09 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Phyllis Schlafly
Aug. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Patrick Buchanan
Pat BuchananUpdated 29 Aug 2014
David Harsanyi
David HarsanyiUpdated 29 Aug 2014
Suzanne Fields
Suzanne FieldsUpdated 29 Aug 2014

13 Aug 2013 Why Republicans Didn't Win in 2012

16 Jul 2008 Obama Rejects English Language Assimilation

1 Sep 2009 Un-American and Unlawful White House Projects